CELEBRATING ERA'S TWENTIETH ANNIVERSARY ------- New England Regional Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region I 19901 D ii renew Celebrating EPA's Twentieth Anniversary ------- 1990: Region I Celebrates Twenty Years The New England office of the United States Environmental Protection Agency is one of ten regional offices around the country -,.~.r ;», -.-#-,• :;f tfat cooperates closely with state and local governments to implement fed- eral environ- mental laws. In 1990 we cel- ebrate the twen- -•"-•- " tieth anniver- sary of the creation of EPA. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s EPA's responsibilities—both at the national and regional levels— expanded with the passage of major new environmental laws, which were enacted to protect the ground, air, and water. Today EPA's New England Office administers programs and enforces regulations designed to protect the environments of the six New England states: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. As we enter a new de- cade, we look forward to changes in the way we regard environmental protection: no longer are clean-up and control measures adequate, we are looking for ways to prevent pollution before it occurs. If you would like more informa- tion about EPA Region I and its programs or additional copies of this year in review, contact the Office of Public Affairs, U.S. EPA, Mail Code: RPA-74, JFK Federal Building, Boston, MA 02203, Telephone (617) 565-2713. Contents Message from the Regional Administrator Protecting the New England Environment 1 Julie Belaga Twenty Years of EPA 3 William K. Reilly, EPA Administrator A Look Back: Former Regional Administrators Reflect on 4 their Years in Region I John A.S. McGlennon, 1971-1977 William R. Adams, 1977-1981 Lester A. Sutton, 1981-1983 Michael R. Deland, 1983-1989 Leading the EPA into the Next Decade: Notes from the Divisions 7 Air Management Division 7 Water Management Division 12 Waste Management Division 18 Office of Regional Counsel 23 Office of Public Affairs 26 Office of Government Relations and Environmental Review 29 Environmental Services Division 32 Planning and Management Division 35 Office of Civil Rights 37 Message from the Deputy Regional Administrator The Shift to State Responsibility 38 Paul Keough Report from Connecticut 40 Report from Maine 41 Report from Massachusetts 42 Report from New Hampshire 43 Report from Rhode Island 44 Report from Vermont 45 Financial Overview 47 Composition of Region I Work Force 47 ------- U.S. EPA Headquarters Library Mail code 3201 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20460 Protecting the New England Environment Julie Beluga my first year as EPA . Regional Administrator ends, it is time to look back and measure our accomplishments in terms of how they set the stage for future progress. This was a year when popular- ity for the environment reached new highs, not only in New En- gland and the nation, but around the world. Earth Day 1990 became a dynamic mobilizing force for citizens on every continent to take action for a cleaner global environ- ment. Public support has never been greater and public expecta- tions have never been higher. With the eyes of citizens on us across the region, 1 can look back over this year with an enormous sense of pride in the accomplishments of a very talented staff. Compliance with the nation's environmental laws is critical to the overall strategy for providing for a healthy environment and strong regional economy. In fiscal year 1990, the emphasis on en- forcement in the Superfund pro- gram produced the highest number of settlements for clean-up of haz- ardous waste sites in the region's history. Several of our criminal cases established national and legal precedents. Region I was breaking ground throughout this year with many national "firsts" in enforcement and in protecting vital resources here in New England. Here are some highlights of a productive year: In March of this year, EPA issued a final determination that prohibits the use of Big River, Mishnock River, their tributaries and adjacent wetlands as a site for a proposed water supply reservoir in Coventry, Rhode Island. If it had been approved, the project would have resulted in the direct loss of at least 575 acres of exceptional wet- lands, approximately seventeen miles of free-flowing cold water streams, ten ponds and 2,500 acres of primarily forested uplands. We were pleased that headquarters concurred with our decision. President George Bush an- nounced that Casco Bay in Maine and Massachusetts Bay have been added to the EPA's National Estu- ary program. Designation allows for extensive study of these two areas to develop a comprehensive management plan. In early sum- mer, EPA announced the comple- tion of the nation's very first estu- ary study—Buzzards Bay near Cape Cod. The plan outlines strategies for cleaning up the bay and pre- venting pollution through local initiatives. I am proud to have this achievement stand as a model for other significant estuarine ecosys- tems across the country. What we have learned in Buzzards Bay will help us in our four other National Estuaries in the region. An agreement in principal was reached with AVX Corporation of New York for $66 million in a partial settlement of the New Bedford Harbor Superfund site in Massachusetts. The money paid by AVX will be used to fund the cleanup of the widespread PCB contamination of the harbor, to restore natural resources in the harbor area, and to reimburse ex- penses already paid by the state and federal government. ------- Connecticut became the first state in the country to receive fed- eral approval for its "Wellhead Protection Plan." Close behind were the five other New England states. Designation affirms that While we continue to make progress in all areas, what I am most excited about is the enor- mous successes we are seeing in pollution prevention initiatives all across New England. safeguards will be put in place for the long-term protection of groundwater resources. It is local zoning that will make the differ- ence. We are the only region in the nation in which all states have ap- proved Wellhead Protection laws. In a first-time-in-the-nation decision, a federal jury returned guilty verdicts on criminal charges against a Massachusetts company and its president for knowingly endangering the health and safety of his employees and the environ- ment under the Clean Water Act. Borjohn Optical Technology, Inc. of Burlington, Massachusetts and its president John Borowski were found guilty after a four-week trial of illegally discharging toxic metal and dangerous chemicals into the sewer system and for endangering company employees as a result. Twenty years ago when we first got into the business of environ- mental protection we went about it as any good manager in business would. First, we identified the problem: then we designed a solu- tion that we thought would put an end to it. We developed statutes and regulations that addressed the pollution problem, but these new laws didn't solve it. Our regulations were written from a single vantage point. We looked at what was coming out of the sewage pipe, the smokestack, and the tail pipe...and made sure that it didn't come out of that pipe any longer. What we were really doing was playing a game of "Hot Potato" with pollution...the pollution po- tato. While it no longer went up the stack, we disposed of it as ash in the ground; or we extracted it from the soil and then incinerated it—up the stack again. The pollu- tion potato was being tossed from the air to the ground, to the groundwater, and back again. Our collage of laws, each one written with a single purpose in mind, needs now to be integrated into a total management system that protects our precious re- sources. Billowing smokestacks are no longer the norm on the horizon, and our rivers don't burn any more. Progress has been made. But we cannot let these successes keep us from seeking lasting solutions. It is time we review the current management system and create one that meets today's need and tomorrow's dream. This nation, as a society, must begin to integrate pollution preven- tion into the way we design, build, and regulate, as well as in the way we consume and dispose. We must begin at the drawing board, not the dumpster. Innovation is the key to pro- gress. When we look back on the decade of the 1990s, we will be judged not on individual cases or single fines, but on our innovations of thought. I want it to be written into history that we were the plan- ners for a future that thought first of how to prevent pollution rather than how to clean it up. To be truly effective in prevent- ing pollution, every sector of the economy must take part, every person must be involved. Together we will leave a cleaner world for future generations and a culture that thinks first of prevention. ?f ------- William Reilly, EPA Administrator, at Fanueil Hall, Boston. L i P/\ Ul III r"_l .>— fenjuly 9, 1970—twenty -^ :^jr years ago and fewer than three months after the first Earth Day—the process of creating the United States Environmental Protection Agency officially began when President Richard Nixon sent Congress his proposal to consoli- date major pollution control pro- grams into a new agency. On De- cember 2, 1970, the agency came into existence. In celebrating this anniversary, we can take pride in the progress we have made over the past two decades in improving the quality of our air, land, and waters. We have made tremendous progress on many of the worst pollution prob- lems. Yet many problems remain unresolved, and new problems have become evident—often diffi- cult to solve, often global in scope. During the challenging years ahead, the broad advances that the agency has made during its first twenty years provide a strong foun- dation from which to address fu- ture challenges effectively. In order to prepare ourselves for the formidable array of environ- mental challenges ahead, we must strengthen our research program and the scientific underpinnings of our work. We must improve our recruitment and training programs to assure a top quality, culturally diverse work force. We must in- volve our staff directly in setting goals through strategic planning and in meeting those goals through the teamwork and continuous im- provement offered by total quality management. We must develop and apply new and emerging approaches to environmental problems — pollution pre- \) vention, market-based j incentives, sue initiatives that improve the natural systems on which our well- being depends. All in all, a tall agenda lies be- fore us. We have the chance to take charge of the agenda and to show that EPA delivers. It's an exciting time to be at EPA. ?f .U O bioremediationg and other technologies, risk-based priority- setting, and cross- media and geographi- cally targeted strate- gies, among others. We must emphasize better outreach to affected con- / stituencies and develop new modes of working with other fed- eral agencies, states and localities, governments abroad, and our many other partners. We need to foster environmental education and pur- ' i \ ^ 0\ ------- Former Regional Administrators Reflect on Their Years in I John A.S. McClennon, 1971 -1977 I think everyone associated with the Region I office of EPA can look back with pride at the ac- complishments of the agency over the last twenty years. Although I recall references to a "paper tiger" when the staffs of some thirteen different federal agencies were brought together in early 1971 to become the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, no one today can doubt the significant contribu- tion that EPA has made toward improving our environment and quality of life. Our goal during the early years was to respond effectively to con- gressional mandates included in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 and the Clean Water Act Amend- ments of 1972. This meant working with the state agencies to develop approvable State Implementation Plans, issuing thousands of NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits, and committing hundreds of millions of dollars in construction grants. We also wanted to show both the environmental and business commu- nities that EPA was a force to be reckoned with. This meant the ag- gressive use of our enforcement au- thorities. Our principle was "firm but lair," and 1 believe this continues to be the standard of the regional office. Accomplishing these goals meant recruiting additional staff. 1 am pleased to see that many of the people I enjoyed working with so much still hold key positions in the regional office. These include Steve Ells, Les Sutton, Harley Laing, Ed Conley, Mel Hohman, Lou Gitto, Dave Fierra, and Paul Keough, to name only a few. There were some real accom- plishments during the six years that I was at EPA. But there were also some setbacks. I cannot even re- member how many transportation control plans we proposed for the city of Boston. These plans included such radical ideas as limiting park- ing availability in Boston, required inspection and maintenance of all automobiles, one-way tolls, and incentives for the use of carpools. We even dared to suggest that all employees leave their car at home one day a week. These proposals were met with ridicule and disdain. Perhaps the most controversial decision that we made was the de- nial of the discharge permit for the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant dur- ing the presidential campaign of 1976. The issue was whether or not the appplicant adequately showed that there would be no adverse environmental impacts from the thermal discharge. Although 1 elo- quently defended the decision at a congressional inquiry, it was re- versed by the new administrator. Nineteen hundred seventy-five and 1976 brought Love Canal and the passage of RCRA (the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act), giving EPA new authority to man- age the treatment and disposal of hazardous waste. As 1 look back, 1 regret that we did not recognize the threat of toxic waste to our environ- ment and public health earlier. 1 now observe the agency's ac- tivities from a different perspective; and no matter how frustrating the Superfund Program is, I continue to be your most loyal supporter. The regional administrators who fol- lowed me have continued to aggres- sively defend the environment, and it is clear that Julie Belaga continues in that tradition. Congratulations for twenty years of proud accom- plishments. ?$• John McClennon is president of ERM New England, an environmental con- sulting firm in Boston, Massachusetts. William R. Adams, Jr. 1977- 1981 I was pleased to receive the invi- tation to "look back" at my experiences at EPA. My service at the agency brought me per- sonal satisfaction and a sense that I contributed to make the world a better place to live. It seems impossible that EPA is celebrating its twentieth anniver- sary. During the past twenty years 1 have been closelv associated with ------- the agency and its people. I first saw the agency through the eyes of a state administrator, then of the Regional Administrator, and now of an officer in a consulting firm deeply involved in solving the nation's environmental problems. Each experience brought its own perspective, but one common per- ception remained throughout: EPA's mandate of administering extremely complex environmental laws and regulations is a difficult one. In fulfilling its mandate the agency is under continual attack from nearly all segments of our society. One group feels that the EPA is too stringent and another feels it is too lax. Everybody has a position: there is no middle ground. In my view, the agency's man- date has become continually more challenging. Consider, for example, how much easier the Clean Water Act was to administer than today's hazardous waste legislation. I believe EPA's success—for EPA has been successful—may be attributed to the talents and dedica- tion of its "troops." I recognized the quality of EPA's staff when 1 was a state administrator, but my real appreciation for them came during my service as Regional Administra- tor. EPA has set itself apart from other federal agencies by the quality of the staff. The employment of intelligent, educated, ambitious people dedicated to improving the environment began with the origi- nal agency staff and continues to- day. The agency began with a pur- pose and vision to make the coun- try a safer, better place to live. This dream is frequently attacked by people both in and out of govern- ment, but it manages to survive. It survived when the agency's top leadership brought controversy, doubt, and national headlines to bear on the agency. In my view it was the strength and determination of the "troops" that allowed the agency to survive and regain credibility. It was the people of EPA who never lost their faith and vision, who carried the agency through those difficult times. It is my prayer that those I served with will continue their leadership and training so that the spirit of today's EPA and the EPA of tomorrow will reflect the same dedicated qualities that made the Region I staff so special to me. it- Bill Adams is vice president of ABB Environmental Services, Inc. in Portland, Maine. Lester A. Sutton, 1981 - 1983 Things were not going well for EPA during the early 1980s when I was Regional Administra- tor. Those years were the most tumultuous in the history of our agency. What started as an honest difference of opinion on how best to run the agency soon escalated into a con- spiracy theory that claimed the administration was out to destroy the agency and the environment. Each day there were headlines grossly exaggerating and distorting every action taken by the agency. The hysteria finally subsided after Anne Gorsuch was forced to re- sign, but many careers were ruined in the process. It was not a pleasant time to be Regional Administrator. As I look back on the changes that have occurred at EPA since those days, it is gratifying to see the growth of the agency, the ex- pansion of our programs, the im- provements to our environment for which we can claim responsibility, and the increased public aware- ness, concern, and support for environmental issues. Our progress has been even more impressive when viewed from my days at the newly established agency back in 1970. Few could have predicted in those early years the enormous expansion in our responsibilities (that would take place over the next years—and will probably culminate in the soon-to- be-established cabinet level for a Department of the Environment), as the environmental movement has become one of the most impor- tant factors in national and interna- tional affairs. Looking to the future, our pro- grams are certain to become in- creasingly complex as environmen- tal problems and their solutions become more difficult and expen- sive. In order to handle these prob- lems efficiently, we must be more effective in enlisting the coopera- tion of outside groups including citizens, states, municipalities, businesses, authorities, consult- ants, contractors, professional or- ganizations, and other federal agencies. We have not always given sufficient attention to working cooperatively. We should improve our communication with all groups so that they can clearly understand our requirements and what is ex- pected of them. We should listen seriously to their concerns and, to the extent possible, take them into account in carrying out our pro- grams. It is particularly important to improve our relationships with the business community and the states. Too often we appear to be anti- business and anti-growth. A more cooperative approach with the business community and local ------- governments can result in more effective environmental programs. Wherever possible, the states should be allowed to run their own programs with minimal interfer- ence from EPA. Our role should be to assist and overview the states and to take over specific programs only when the states are incapable or unwilling to carry out the laws. Over the years I have seen us moving more and more toward the use of regulation and enforcement as our primary weapons in the fight for a clean environment. There are dangers in this approach. It has often led to an adversarial relationship in our dealings with outside groups that can be counter- productive. The excessive use of enforcement actions, without first trying to reach agreeement by ne- gotiation, can lead to serious delays in clean-up activities and can ad- versely affect the spirit of coopera- tion we will need in the future. We seem to measure our progress by the number of enforcement actions taken and fines collected, rather than the extent of environmental cleanup achieved. More effort should be devoted to explaining clearly our requirements and pro- viding technical assistance to busi- nesses and local governments. En- forcement actions should be a last, rather than a first, resort. We should strive to become a "kinder and gentler" EPA. * Les Sutton is special assistant to the Regional Administrator of EPA Region I in Boston, Massachusetts. Michael R. Deland, 1983 - 1989 Twenty Years of Momentum Memories of 1970 evoke Earth Day messages re- sounding across the na- tion and images of Americans dem- onstrating for clean air, for clean water, for unspoiled land—for the environment. The events of 1970 promised a prominent place for the environment on the national agenda. In one year, we witnessed the signing of the National Envi- ronmental Policy Act, the creation of the Council on Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency, and the passage of the Clean Air Act: all fundamen- tal building blocks for strengthen- ing environmental quality in the United States. With the creation of EPA came the call for a corps of professionals committed to environmental pro- tection. I was lucky to be among some of the earliest employees in the Boston office. For a young at- torney two years out of law school, EPA was indeed an exciting and challenging place to be. I well re- member writing the legal "boilerplate" for the first NPDES permits while Ed Conley, David Fierra, and their engineers were drawing on New England ingenuity and common sense to derive the discharge limits. From the outset, Region I was in the vanguard as those permits became the national norm. EPA employees, now as then, are the soul of the agency. Success has always come from the strength, quality, and commitment of the region's dedicated workforce. Suc- cess in the future will depend on continued recruitment and devel- opment of environmental profes- sionals. During my term as Regional Administrator, we set many re- gional and national precedents thanks to the depth of the New England team. We enforced firmly but fairly, set in motion the long overdue cleanup of Boston Harbor and made a significant contribution to the protection of America's wet- lands by stopping the unnecessary destruction of Sweedens Swamp in Attleboro, Massachusetts. As we move forward, there is growing recognition that a clean environment and a growing economy can go hand in hand. We are in the vanguard of what Presi- dent Bush has called "an entirely new way of thinking to achieve both while compromising neither, by applying the power of the mar- ketplace in the service of the envi- ronment." This maturation in our thinking is evidenced by the con- tinuing shift in emphasis from the "command and control" approach that regulates pollutants at the end of the pipe to a newer focus on pre- venting pollution in the first place. Although some promises of 1970 are yet to be fulfilled, we have indeed come a long way: we have dramatically reduced or stabilized many pollutants while our economy has grown by nearly 75 percent. But I am reminded again of the wisdom of President Eliot of Harvard: "A good past is positively dangerous, if it makes us content with the present and so unprepared for the future." Here's to another twenty years of progress and to the Council on Environmental Quality working contructively with the new Department of the Environ- ment! ?f Mike Deland is chairman of the President's Council on Environmen- tal Quality in Washington, D.C. ------- Lou Git to Director / 'O' A Pollution Prevention Program for the 1990s and Beyond Iy pollution prevention vision for EPA's third decade has three parts, each with opportunities for achieving strong environmental rewards and public support, as well as for continued U.S./international economic com- petitiveness. The first is that EPA will exert international leadership and suc- cessfully remove from the interna- tional marketplace many chemicals that significantly contribute to fouling the environment (either in their manufacture, use, or dis- posal). Promising signs include the international agreement to phase out chloroflourocarbons (CFCs) and the work EPA is currently doing with other countries to re- view existing chemicals suspected of being particularly harmful to the point that their use may be cur- tailed in the global marketplace. The second is that EPA will push successfully for conservative use of energy and the sharing of efficient technologies internation- ally. Promising signs for this goal are the acid rain cap and marketing provisions in the Clean Air Act Amendments which will spur the energy industry into designing for greater efficiency and a wider di- versity in production. And third is for EPA to be suc- cessful in pressing for transporta- tion system changes in this coun- try, especially in densely populated areas, that will effectively and in a non- (or less) polluting manner move people and materials. Prom- ising signs are that Clean Air Act Amendments urge states to con- sider fuel and transportation changes for ozone and carbon monoxide (CO) planning. Some states already have increased fuel fees for transportation-related infrastructure improvements. A clearly articulated plan can coa- lesce these and other concepts to forge a new transportation and environmental partnership, fa ------- Asbestos in Schools All public and non-profit private primary and secondary schools must have their buildings in- spected for asbestos hazards and develop asbestos management plans to assure the protection of students and school workers. This is the essence of the Asbestos Haz- ard Emergency Response Act (AHERA). Inspections, manage- ment plan development, and asbes- tos abatement work must be per- formed by workers/planners/con- tractors accredited through EPA- approved training. Compliance rate is now close to 100 percent, resulting from the issuance and follow-up of almost 500 Notices of Non-Compliance, and administrative enforcement complaints against recalcitrant schools for failure to develop plans. Complaints were also filed against asbestos contractors for not meet- ing AHERA requirements. In addi- tion, EPA issued a total of nearly $800,000 in asbestos grants under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to all six of the New En- gland states to enhance their pro- grams. Radon Initiatives Indoor radon is projected to cause 20,000 lung cancer cases nationally per year. To combat this public health threat, Region I has worked closely in the past four years with the New England states to promote public awareness of the need to test our homes and to remediate them as necessary. The region designated February, 1990, as "Radon Home Testing Month" and organized a variety of outreach activities in- cluding a series of joint state/EPA press conferences in five of our states, a contract with the Lung Association to publicize radon information materials, a radon booth at the New England Home Show, mass mailings to print media outlets, and sending radio and TV stations public service announce- ments to air. There was a notice- able increase in both media atten- tion and public inquiries. In addition, the Region awarded over $700,000 in first-ever radon grants to the six New England states and two Indian tribes under the new Indoor Radon Abatement Act. These grants are awarded to aid state development of outreach, technical assistance and research/ development activities related to the radon problem. Pesticides The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) gives states primacy for the regulation of the use of pesticides. In FY90 more than $1.4 million in grant monies went to fund the development of new programs for the protection of groundwater, endangered species, and workers, and to enhance exist- ing programs throughout New England. This marks a doubling of funds available and reflects the growing awareness that pesticide problems can be more effectively regulated at the state, rather than the national level. Region I enforcement actions against pesticide producers/distribu- tors lead to two major cases, which carried proposed fines of $100,000 for illegal safety claims and mis- branded/adulterated products. Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Under Section 313 of the Emer- gency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), in- dustry is required each year to report their emissions of toxic chemicals. Now in the third year of this program, Region I again con- ducted an aggressive outreach and technical assistance campaign to industry on these reporting re- quirements, which included con- ducting eleven workshops with over 1,000 attendees. In addition, the region stepped up its enforce- ment program against non-report- ers in a major effort to increase the industry compliance rate, which is estimated to be about seventy per- cent nationally. With the develop- ment of a new inspection targeting scheme, inspections are yielding a ninety-five percent violation rate for inspected facilities, and our rate of issuance of enforcement cases is rising: thirty complaints with pro- posed fines of more than $1.5 mil- lion have been issued since inspec- tions began in FY89. Since the value of the TRI data rests in its use, Region I began sev- eral initiatives aimed at promoting the use of the data by EPA pro- grams, the states, industry, environ- mental groups and the public. The region also began analyses of the TRI data for New England, secured funding from EPA headquarters to host a workshop to assist industry in reducing CFC emissions as a result of our analyses of TRI data (CFCs are a class of chemicals which act to destroy our protective ozone layer— Massachusetts ranked third in the ------- nation in freon-113 emissions, an important component of CFCs), and secured funding for a health professionals' conference on risk assessment using the TRI data to be sponsored by the region later this year. The region is also funding a TRI risk assessment project by the New Hampshire Department of Health and is working with Con- necticut and EPA Headquarters on •a risk screening initiative in Con- necticut using the TRI data. PCBs Region I negotiated a settlement with the Great Northern Paper Company of Millinocket, Maine, for a clean-up of several major PCB spills. The cleanup is ex- pected to cost $10 million. With limited administrative authority under TSCA to require cleanup, this settlement of an administra- tive complaint with an initial pro- posed penalty of only $28,500 shows the commitment of both Region I and Great Northern to cooperate in finding equitable solutions to significant environ- mental problems. In another major PCB case, Region I issued an administrative complaint to United Technologies Corporation of Hartford, Connecti- cut, for $1.167 million. This is the largest PCB complaint filed under the Toxic Substance Control Act ever issued by the region, and was the first to use "per-day penalties." The large proposed penalty reflects UTC's poor compliance record, with four prior PCB complaints issued by the region since 1985, and the EPA's commitment to as- sure compliance by such large cor- porations. This past year, the region issued a total of nineteen administrative complaints for PCB violations with fines totalling more than $2.6 million. Enforcement Can Carry Pollution Prevention Benefits The region has implemented a policy of seeking to reduce pollu- tion through the use of environ- mentally beneficial expenditure credits to offset proposed fines from administrative enforcement complaints issued under TSCA, FIFRA and EPCRA (Section 313). Companies may reduce proposed penalties by taking such actions as changes in equipment or manufac- turing processes resulting in actual emission reductions, public educa- tion efforts, or company-wide au- dits for compliance with all envi- ronmental regulations. Credits can only be given for activities that are not required to come into compliance with existing laws and regulations. Notable successes in the past year include expenditures of: $95,000 by Seekonk Lace in Barrington, Rhode Island, to eliminate the use of a toxic solvent (acetone) through a change in mechanical processes as part of an EPCRA Section 313 settlement; $108,000 by Simplex Wire and Cable in Newington, New Hampshire, and $67,000 by Papertech Corp. in Contoo- cook, New Hampshire for the removal of PCB transformers and equipment as part of the settlement of TSCA PCB com- plaints and; $70,000 proposed expenditure by Safer, Inc., of Wellesley, Massachusetts to produce and distribute a public education pamphlet on the safe use of pesticides in the home as part of the settlement of a FIFRA complaint. Connecticut Rule Effectiveness Study Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coating Regulation EPA studied Connecticut's miscel- laneous metal parts and products (MMP&P) coating regulation for its effectiveness in reducing harm- ful volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. The law requires that sources submit coating usage data to EPA. Following a mailing of the Connecticut rules to 235 busi- nesses and industries most likely effected by them, thirty-seven fa- cility inspections were performed. Of those, twenty-two sources were found to be operating in violation of the MMP&P regulation. Notices of Violation (NOVs) were issued to most of the violating sources. Of the twenty-two sources found in violation, eight have been classi- fied as "Significant Violators." The study determined the Connecticut MMP&P regulation to be 80.7 percent effective in reducing VOC emissions. How- ever, it is estimated that VOC emissions can be reduced by an- other 1000 tons per year if the Connecticut Department of Envi- ronmental Protection were to implement the corrective actions noted in the EPA study. The state is in the process of implementing these corrective actions. United States vs. Cappoziello In February, 1990, Thomas Cappoziello and his company, Bridgeport Wrecking Company, Inc. (BWC) of Bridgeport, Con- necticut, were found guilty of criminal violations of the National ------- Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) asbestos regulations (Asbestos NESHAP). BWC was fined $30,000, and Mr. Cappoziello was fined $10,000 and sentenced to one year in prison, with a mandatory three months to be served, for Asbestos NESHAP violations which occurred during a demolition project at the Knudsen Dairy Farm in North Haven, Con- necticut. The court found BWC guilty of failure to remove friable asbestos- containing materials from a build- ing prior to commencing demoli- tion operations and failure to wet friable asbestos materials during stripping and removal to ensure that the materials remain wet until disposed of in a approved landfill. The court found Thomas Cappoziello guilty of failure to no- tify EPA about the Knudsen Dairy Farm demolition project. The sen- tence is currently under appeal. Reid Vapor Pressure and the Impact on State Implementation Plans (SIP) In a precedent-setting move to- wards pollution prevention, gaso- line volatility control regulations in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island were written into those states' revisions of State Implementation Plans (SIP). High quality and swift action on SIP revi- sions achieved significant environ- mental results in the form of sub- stantial reductions in summertime emissions of volatile organic com- pounds; spared the agency defen- sive legal action; and promoted harmonious working relationships with the Northeast states. Of greatest significance was that Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) regula- tions were federally enforceable in time for the onset of the 1989 ozone season. RVP requires a refor- mulation of gasoline that effec- tively burns cleaner and with lower amounts of VOCs being emitted. It is these and other emissions that produce ground level ozone and summertime smog conditions and the reason for the need for chang- ing the volatility of gasoline. Con- cerns for cold weather starts for automobiles in our New England winters were addressed, and al- though cooler weather in 1989 certainly has been an important contributor to a less severe ozone season than in 1988, there is little doubt that the RVP team's work made a difference. ?f Reducing Risks from the Use of Toxic Chemicals Iur society has become heavily dependent on the use of toxic chemicals, which affect all of us in our daily lives in many ways, some of which are not entirely understood, or even known. EPA and the states have developed important programs to regulate end-of-the-line emissions of pollutants to our environment, to dispose of and treat newly cre- ated toxic waste, and to clean up toxic waste sites. However, there is a growing awareness that the prob- lem of exposure to toxic chemicals can not be thought of only in terms of the generation of air, water or waste discharges. For example, many products commonly used in construction and in the home today are potential sources of toxic chemi- cal exposure and have resulted in emerging fields of study in indoor air pollution and worker protection. There is, also, a new realization that exposure to toxic chemicals must also be managed by taking measures to reduce potential risks at the front-of-the-line in the pro- cess, i.e. in the manufacture and use of toxic chemicals. This is one of the central concepts in EPA's new program emphasis on pollu- tion prevention. Two statutes perhaps not as well known to the general public as the Clean Air and Water Acts, can be instrumental in helping achieve our goal of reducing risks from toxic chemicals. The Toxic Sub- stances Control Act (TSCA) was passed in 1976 and charges EPA with regulating the introduction of new chemicals into our channels of manufacturing and trade, and with identifying chemicals in use prior to TSCA that require additional testing, risk assessment, and regu- latory control. For both new and existing chemicals the goal of TSCA is to reduce unreasonable risk after consideration of both the benefits and costs of toxic chemical use. In addition, the Emergency Plan- ning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986 requires industry to submit information on the quantity of use and emissions of many chemicals that are currently un- regulated by other statutes. TSCA and EPCRA, in combina- tion, present a set of powerful tools for finding out what toxic chemi- cals are out there, what risks they 10 ------- might present to both the environ- ment and public health, and how those risks can be reduced. Both non-regulatory (e.g. voluntary industry reduction through changes in manufacturing process) and regulatory (e.g. banning the manufacture or otherwise control- ling the use of a toxic chemical) approaches to risk management can be pursued under the broad authorities of TSCA. Currently, EPA's Office of Toxic Substances, in addition to continuing the new chemicals re- view and registration program, is examining ways to streamline the screening of existing chemicals, prioritizing the chemicals in order to achieve maximum risk reduction with limited resources. The re- gional offices enforce the TSCA use/ban regulations currently in place for PCBs, asbestos, and chro- mium, enforce the requirements on industry to register new chemicals and to keep TSCA-required records on the use of new and existing chemicals; enforce the reporting requirements under EPCRA; and work with other EPA programs, industry, environmental groups, state and local officials on the ac- cess, analysis, interpretation, and use of EPCRA data. The EPCRA data on releases of toxic chemicals is unique in that it is all publicly available to anyone through the National Library of Medicine. As more and more evidence accumulates on the dangers of toxic chemicals in all forms, EPA must work creatively to use its limited resources to prioritize the chemicals requiring further testing and risk assessment. The TSCA Chemical Inventory now contains over 65,000 chemical substances, only 6,000 of which have been reviewed under the new chemicals program. In addition, we must find the best approaches for managing unreasonable risks through an optimal combination of regulatory and non-regulatory approaches. While the Office of Toxic Sub- stances is primarily responsible for designing this program, the re- gional offices will play an increas- ing role in identifying additional hazards to be evaluated, reviewing alternative risk reduction mea- sures, implementing chosen mea- sures through aggressive enforce- ment, and promoting voluntary industry reductions through tech- nical outreach and assistance ef- forts. A key function in the years ahead for the regional offices will be in helping to forge the new in- frastructure that will be necessary among federal and state agencies, industry, labor, environmental and other public interest groups. Un- like many of the more mature end- of-the-line pollution control pro- grams, there is no well defined infrastructure to support programs for controlling the use of toxic chemicals. Given the size of the task ahead of us, decentralization of certain facets of the programs to the states will be a major emphasis. Finally, all of us, including the public at large, can play an impor- tant role through pressure on regu- latory agencies and industry to reduce the toxic chemicals threat that has crept into almost all facets of our daily life. We can also have a direct impact through intelligent use of recycling, by careful use of products that contain toxic chemi- cals, by switching to less toxic products whenever possible, and by proper disposal of toxic prod- ucts such as paints, cleaning prod- ucts, and home/garden pesticides. ?f ------- ITJSLOII David Fierra Director Challenges to Water Quality Programs • believe the greatest challenge to water quality programs in the 1990s will be to place more emphasis on a proactive resource protection approach. At the same time we must continue to address existing water quality problems, particularly from combined sewer overflows and stormwater, and maintain the gains in pollution control we have already made. However, since most of the emerging threats to our water re- sources are from land use activities over which the federal government has very little control, our tradi- tional command and control ap- proach will not work. Instead we must assist state, regional, and local governments to exercise their au- thorities to protect the water re- sources by properly guiding and managing development. Over recent years we have come to realize that preventing pollution is a far wiser approach to environmen- tal management than attempting to restore environmental degradation. To promote this approach we have developed a hierarchy of ac- tions we will implement or encour- age and assist others to implement. The highest level is the goal of preserving existing high value re- sources through, for instance, plac- ing restrictions on development in and around critical wetlands and water supply sources. The second level is to assure that future development is compat- ible with the protection of critical water resources. This approach is exemplified by the state wellhead protection programs as well as by regulations that limit loadings of nutrients into lakes and estuaries to levels that will not cause adverse impacts. Since the states and local governments have the primary au- thorities to implement these actions, our efforts will be mainly to provide assistance and to assure that suc- cessful approaches are communi- cated to others in the region. Our final level in this hierarchy is to reduce as much pollution at the source as we possibly can. Ac- tivities included here will be to encourage industries to reduce their wastestreams through both regula- tory and non-regulatory ap- proaches, to foster the conservation of water by communities and citi- zens, and to work with state and local agencies to require the imple- mentation of best management prac- tices on all diffuse sources of pollu- tion such as agriculture and residen- tial and commercial development. With appropriate emphasis on this pollution prevention/resources protection approach, I believe we can develop a balanced program that maintains the gains we've made while greatly minimizing environ- mental degradation in the future. * ------- Boston Harbor The cleanup of Boston Harbor con- tinued to make progress during the past year. The Massachusetts Water Resource Authority (MWRA) com- plied with the court schedule for the initiation of the construction of a secondary wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) at Deer Island to handle all the flow from the 42 communities that surround Boston. The MWRA has completed con- struction of the piers and staging areas to move the equipment and workers to and from Boston and Deer Island. It is also developing plans to address the problems of combined sewer overflows. Each month the MWRA and EPA must report to the court on the progress of the Harbor cleanup and any potential problems encountered. EPA has completed the Environ- mental Impact Statement (EIS) on the siting options for die disposal of die sludge from die WWTP, but a final siting decision has not yet been made. The court schedule requires that the discharge of sludge to the ocean cease by die end of 1991. The new primary plant is scheduled to be on line by 1995 and die second- ary plant, by 1999. Environmental Enforcement Region I maintained a strong and aggressive water enforcement pro- gram, placing increased emphasis on criminal enforcement, particu- larly in the pretreatment area. The region successfully pursued four criminal actions, including two actions against metal platers in Lowell, Massachusetts, for illegally discharging toxics into the munici- pal sewer system, which in turn discharges to the Merrimack River, a major source of drinking water. The companies Astro Circuits Cor- poration and Wells Metal Finish- ing, Inc. of Lowell, were convicted at separate trials. These cases were the first in the region to result in jail sentences being issued for envi- ronmental violations. With assis- tance from the Connecticut De- partment of Environmental Protec- tion the region also filed an action against Dexter Paper Corporation for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) efflu- ent violations. This civil suit seeks a multi-million-dollar penalty, one of the largest civil penalties ever proposed in the region for environ- mental violations. The region referred four civil actions to the Department of Jus- tice for unpermitted filling of wet- lands and settled another civil case against Manchester, Connecticut for $300,000 as well as substantial restoration. Additionally, the re- gion referred two criminal cases to the Department of Justice for sub- mission of fraudulent data from public water systems. Toxic Chemical Control The Region I NPDES Permit Pro- gram reached a peak in controlling toxic chemicals during FY 1990. Each of the approximately forty municipal permits issued by the region this year contained limits on whole effluent toxicity as well as monitoring requirements to ensure that the limits are not exceeded. (These permits aim to monitor and control biological as well as chemi- cal contamination.) Additionally the Water Division has completed 55 individual control strategies for identified toxic dischargers in ac- cordance with section 304(1) of the Water Pollution Control Act of 1987. Another 20 industrial permits will also contain chemical specific or whole effluent toxicity limits and monitoring requirements. These requirements in NPDES permits will be tracked for compli- ance by the toxidata system devel- oped by the NPDES program. All major dischargers were made aware in the spring of 1990 that Region I intends to enforce toxicity limits in permits and will demand strict ad- herence to the scientific protocols developed by the agency. Wellhead Protection Programs The Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986 created a new program to protect groundwa- ter that is used for drinking water. Unlike many other programs the Wellhead Protection Program is preventative, designed to protect water supplies from possible con- tamination. The program provides the states with flexibility in identi- fying sensitive areas around wells and developing management ap- proaches for minimizing the threat from existing and future land uses. Connecticut and Massachusetts had the first two wellhead protec- tion programs in the country, with Rhode Island close behind. The remaining three New England states had programs approved in Septem- ber 1990, making Region I the first region to approve all of its states in wellhead protection programs. 13 ------- The National Estuary Program This year saw the designation of two additional New England estu- aries—Massachusetts Bay and Casco Bay. Maine—to the National Estuary Program. This program is mandated by the Water Quality Act of 1987 to identify, protect and improve nationally significant estu- aries. During a five-year period of study, a local oversight committee. ment Programs for all six New England states. Mandated under the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987, the management programs call for four-year programs to plan for major nonpoint source threats such as land development, con- struction, stormwater runoff, and agricultural activities. The region worked intensively with the states or "management conference," de- velops a Comprehensive Conserva- tion and Management Plan to pro- mote long-term and comprehensive planning and management for the coastal resource in question. The first such extensive plan in the National Estuary Program was completed for Buzzards Bay in June 1990. Recommendations are also being developed for Long Island Sound and Narragansett Bay. Nonpoint Source Management and Protection Programs Region 1 approved Nonpoint Source Assessments and Manage- to develop these programs and follow up with implementation projects, assisted by Clean Water Act grants. These programs are helping the states develop long-range plans to protect existing high-quality estu- aries, lakes, aquifers, and wetlands such as Casco Bay and Sebago Lake in Maine and Lake Champlain in Vermont; stormwater and sediment control regulations are helping to protect Rhode Island's Scituate Reservoir and Narragansett Bay, and aquifers and priority water- sheds are being protected through enforceable statewide agricultural sediment control and stormwater Best Management Practices. Wetlands Protection Programs: Big River The region has taken an aggressive stance this year with regard to wet- lands protection, most notably in the heavily publicized EPA denial of the permit for the Big River res- ervoir. The 3,400-acre water sup- ply reservoir was proposed for construction in West Greenwich and Coventry, Rhode Island as a joint venture by the state of Rhode Island and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The project would have caused an unprecendented loss of nearly 600 acres of valuable wetlands and destroyed habitat for many species of wildlife. Ninety percent of the public comments expressed oppo- sition to the reservoir, citing con- cerns about the environmental impacts, the loss of recreation, and the high cost of the project. Section 404 (c) of the Clean Water Act empowers EPA to pro- tect wetlands and water bodies from construction projects which would cause "unacceptable adverse effects" to, among others, wildlife and recreation. This dam would have transformed a diverse ecosys- tem harboring a wide variety of wildlife into a shallow lake that would benefit only a few species, primarily warm water fish. The loss of 600 acres of wetlands would have been greater than any project permitted in New England since the inception of the Clean Water Act in 1972. i* 14 ------- Drinking Water Protection Program When the Safe Drinking Water Act was passed in 1974, it initiated the first comprehensive national pro- gram to safeguard public drinking water. It brought under federal stan- dards almost 60,000 community water supply systems serving 200 million people daily. The result for many has been a striking improve- ment in drinking water quality. In addition, the state programs for drinking water have become more effective. Federal grants have enabled all six New England states to improve oversight, testing and analytical capabilities. Programs to train and certify system operators have expanded. And many small systems, once ignored, are now under supervision. Thanks to the research con- ducted under the Act, we now have a much better understanding of the nature of organic contaminants in drinking water and their effects on human health. We have recognized the threat of groundwater contami- nation, and we have developed some promising techniques for detecting and removing groundwa- ter contaminants. But many challenging problems remain, in particular the compli- ance of small systems with primary standards. Of almost 60,000 sys- tems, nearly two-thirds serve 500 or fewer people. Many communi- ties have serious technical and economic difficulties in complying with requirements. In response to these challenges, Congress enacted the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986. The new law established specific requirements for regulation of many more contaminants in drink- ing water while giving new en- forcement authority to EPA. The law also banned the use of lead solder and pipe, which have been used extensively in New England. Finally, a new wellhead protection program to protect areas around groundwater supplies has become the cornerstone of EPA's efforts to protect this important resource in New England. Control of Wastewater From Point Sources The passage of the Clean Water Act (CWA) in 1972 established two major programs for the control of wastewater discharging from pipes to the nation's waterways. Title II of CWA provided for federal grants that covered up to 75 percent of the cost to municipalities of the con- struction of wastewater treatment plants. Title IV of the Act established a permit program, known as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimi- nation System (NPDES) that prohib- ited the discharge of pollutants with- out a permit. Permits specify the amount and kind of pollutants that can be discharged. Under Title II of the CWA, EPA, with the cooperation and assistance of the states, has awarded over 54 billion dollars for the construction of 27,000 munici- pal sewers and treatment plants. This program has resulted in marked improvement to the condi- tion of the nation's rivers, lakes and estuaries. At its peak the Con- struction Grants Program under Title II of the Clean Water Act was the largest public works undertaking in the history of the United States. In 1987 the Clean Water Act was amended to include a Title VI, which created a new mechanism for funding Municipal Wastewater Treatment systems. The same amendment provided for the elimi- nation of the old municipal grant process by the states. Now the states use the money as the base for a revolving loan fund; the program is named the State Revolving Fund (SRF). This plan allows the states to provide financial assistance to many more communities on a con- tinuing basis. Financial assistance is given in the form of a low- or no- interest loan and in some cases can be equivalent to a 50 percent grant. The early grant program and its successor, the revolving loan fund, have and will continue to provide the cities and towns across the country with the necessary money to construct complex wastewater treatment systems. While Titles II and VI provided financial assistance to build mu- nicipal treatment plants, Title IV established the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES program required that each discharger of wastewater obtain a permit from EPA in order to discharge legally. This requirement effected 20,000 facilities nationwide. Many of these facilities had only one dis- charge pipe, while others had as many as a hundred pipes discharg- ing pollutants. EPA began to attack this mas- sive job in 1973. Over the years EPA has delegated its authority to states that have met all the strin- gent requirements necessary to take over the program. Today 37 states operate NPDES programs. In the 1970s EPA and the states issued some 20,000 permits, con- tributing greatly to the cleanup of waterways. Failure to comply with the permits can result in civil or criminal penalties. 15 ------- The first permits were issued with an eye toward cleaning up conventional pollutants from mu- nicipal sewers and paper mills. As time went by and permits had to be reissued, EPA gave special atten- tion to industries such as metal finishing, electroplating, and or- ganic chemical manufacturers. National categorical standards were developed for compliance by every facility regardless of location. The categorical standards were in- cluded in all the permits issued in the early 1980s and resulted in the removal of millions of tons of pol- lutants from our waterways. In 1985 EPA began a third round of permit issuance. This time the agency turned its atten- tion to water quality standards and the discharge of chemicals and substances that cause toxicity. Per- mits issued today insure that all pollutants—conventional, chemical specific, and toxic—are limited to maintain water quality standards and minimize the threat to human and aquatic life. As we look to the future we will be attempting to insure that stormwater does not pick up pol- lutants as it flows to the waterways. We will also be examining how sediments in our lakes, rivers and streams become contaminated and how we can correct the problem. Long-standing hotbeds of pollution lying at the bottom of these water- ways can cause serious pollution problems. We have sharply cur- tailed the discharge of pollutants in the past few years, but we must still deal with the pollutants that were discharged long before the establishment of EPA and the pas- sage of the Clean Water Act. Evolution From Point Source Controls to Resource Protection Progress in municipal and indus- trial waste treatment of gross point sources unmasked threats to our waters from nonpoint source pollu- tion as well—ranging from urban storm runoff, construction, and land development to agriculture. Poorly planned land development, for example (both large-scale and cumulative) threatened, degraded, or outright destroyed our heritage of wetlands, estuaries, lakes, and aquifers. In response, first the 1972 Clean Water Act established a pro- gram to help states and regional agencies begin to address nonpoint sources, lakes, and wetlands; later the 1987 Amendments (to the Clean Water Act) established an estuary and bays program and greatly expanded programs for nonpoint sources, toxics, urban stormwater, groundwater, and wetlands. The Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments (1986) estab- lished programs to protect well- head areas and sole source acquifers. EPA established offices for wetlands, estuarine, and groundwater protection. <*• Coastal Protection Over the years, more and more people have been moving to America's shorelines—over half now live in counties along the oceans and the Great Lakes. Along with this rapid population growth comes a panoply of environmental problems, including those associ- ated with solid waste disposal, sewage, lawn chemicals, household wastes, run-off from roads and parking lots, destruction of sensi- tive ecosystems, and air pollution. In some of our harbors the sedi- ments are contaminated from dis- charges that have occurred over many years. These pollutants enter the marine food chain through bottom-dwelling organisms. Each day sewage treatment plants dis- charge 9.5 billion gallons of waste- water effluent into our nation's estuaries. Because of pollution, there are harvest restrictions in about 40 percent of U.S. shellfish beds. But we are committed to pro- tecting our New England coasts in the coming decade, and we are making progress. Between 1972 and 1986 in New England alone, EPA awarded over $3.5 billion in grants for sewage treatment plants, and state and local governments have dedicated many more millions of dollars to the job. In 1982, strong local support from Cape Cod led to EPA's first designation of a sole source aquifer. (We now have designated 12 sole source aquifers.) Cape Cod has been a model in the implementation of watershed planning, and New En- gland has been an active participant in the National Estuary Program. State and local cooperation are leading to better land use planning, both to prevent the destruction of sensitive ecosystems and to avoid generating wastes in areas that simply do not have any more ca- pacity to assimilate them. EPA and the states are reducing the ocean and coastal disharge of industrial and municipal wastewa- ters. Ocean dumping of raw sewage and sewage sludge through outfall pipes will be virtually eliminated. 16 ------- Deep sea disposal of municipal sludge is being phased out, and the ocean has been closed to industrial dumping, waste incineration, and radioactive waste disposal. Ocean dumping of medical wastes is pro- hibited as of 1991. EPA is currently developing rules to implement the Shore Protection Act of 1988, aimed at preventing pollution of coastal waters by vessels transport- ing municipal and commercial wastes. We are confident that the coming decade will see great strides in cleaning up and protect- ing our coastal resources. Protecting Groundwater Clearly, our greatest challenge will be managing the evolution of water programs from correction/restora- tion programs to a greater empha- sis on water resource protection. At the same time we must continue to maintain the integrity of existing control programs during times of tight budgets. We must move to- ward a more proactive preventative approach to preserve the integrity of the environment— for its own sake and also because we cannot afford to continue our financial investment in restoration. We have found through the past decade how difficult and costly it is to clean up groundwater contamination. Consequently our groundwater program stresses pro- tection of the resource through the coordination of federal, state, and local programs. At the federal level we will be challenged with provid- ing technical assistance to both state and local governments to encourage protection before any contamination incident occurs. The challenge will be to do this effectively at a time when most state and local governments are feeling fiscally constrained. Because groundwater protec- tion is so intimately related to land use issues, local governments have an especially significant role to play here. With the help of the states we will need to provide a range of alternatives appropriate to various local governments to help protect their resources. These may include new local land use pro- grams, enforcement of existing regu- lations, pollution prevention initia- tives, and financing strategies. (*• ------- Merrill S. Hohman Director w>< lyiana nt Division A Shifting Emphasis Toward Preventing Pollution Since the creation of EPA twenty years ago, this nation has made significant advances in protecting our environment. Many of our rivers and streams have been re- stored to fishable/swimmable qual- ity, the air in many of our cities no longer poses a threat to our health, and we have established aggressive programs to assure proper manage- ment of our industrial and munici- pal waste streams. We are also making rapid progress in cleaning up the results of improper disposal practices of the past. Perhaps the most exciting news of all is that increasing numbers of Americans continue to support our environ- mental protection programs. At the same time, we have been learning that the problems of the past have been the easier ones to solve. Over the last two decades, as pollutant measurement techniques have advanced, we have discovered that even minute levels of many toxics can pose serious threats to health and the environment. And, we are realizing that our conven- tional approach of command and control is not adequate to address each and every such threat. EPA will place increasing emphasis on programs to help industry and individual citizens reduce or elimi- nate the use of toxic chemicals. Pollution prevention avoids the need for increasingly complex regulations and controls by simply not creating the hazard in the first place. The past twenty years of EPA have been exciting—the next twenty will be even more so as we try to change our society from a chemical-reliant one to a self-reli- ant one. Whether it be through mechanisms such as elimination of unnecessary packaging or less fre- quent use of our automobiles, or through management of growth and development, EPA and the American people will need to work closely together to preserve the gains of the past and to solve the problems of the future. ?f • ------- Sylvester Superfund Site Groundwater Cleanup Installation of a groundwater pump and treatment system at the Sylvester (Gilson Road) Superfund Site in Nashua, New Hampshire in 1987 marked one of the first times this technology was used at a Superfund site. Designed to extract and treat 300 gallons per minute of contaminated groundwater from a twenty-acre manmade containment area, the treatment plant has con- sistently achieved upwards of 95 percent removal of the 16 major chemical compounds. Approxi- mately 75 percent of all contami- nants within the containment area now meet established cleanup lev- els on over 95 percent of the site. It is expected that cleanup lev- els will be met within the next three years at this site. Medical Waste Tracking System Spurred by our East Coast beaches being littered with needles, sy- ringes, vials and other medical waste, and back alley dumpsters overflowing with medical waste improperly disposed of, Region I kicked off what may become the nation's model of a medical waste tracking system. States participat- ing in the pilot are Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and Puerto Rico. The sys- tem parallels the successful cradle- to-grave tracking program devel- oped to handle hazardous wastes. From reports received as part of the program, Region I has found that 48,000 tons of medical waste were produced by 16,400 doctors. dentists, veterinarians, clinics, and hospitals. Hospitals account for ninety-two percent of all medical waste, most of which is inciner- ated. With this program in place, the potential for mismanagement of medical waste from commercial and institutional facilities is greatly reduced. "One dirty LUST story has a clean ending" Northwood Ridge, NH — Gasoline leaking from underground supply tanks at a convenience store on a ridgetop in this southeastern New Hampshire community contami- nated sixteen local wells serving residences, an elementary school, and several businesses. First discov- ered in well water in August 1986, the dissolved gasoline had migrated from the tank area through fractured bedrock into the aquifer supplying the surrounding area. Local residents formed their own water district, mobilizing state environmental and legislative assis- tance. By the summer of 1987, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services had identi- fied and provided alternative water supplies to those affected. When money from the new EPA Leaking Underground Storage Tank Pro- gram became available in Septem- ber of 1987, the community hired an engineering contractor to iden- tify a replacement water supply source. Selected was a water source in an undeveloped high valley on the flank of the Northwood Ridge. It was purchased in the spring of 1989 from two sisters whose ances- tors had settled the land in the eighteenth century. Construction began in the sum- mer of 1989, and the distribution system was substantially complete by December. A final cost recovery settlement came in spring of 1990 and services for the school and private residences were completed in August 1990. The result of all these state and local initiatives is that within four years of the initial discovery of gasoline in their wells and vapors in their homes, Northwood Ridge area residents will be drinking and using clean water from an aquifer whose supply is protected from future contamination, ft- ------- Superfund Gen Manion, 1990 Secretary of the Year, dedicates her time to the Waste Management Division. Since the founding of the U.S. En- vironmental Protection Agency in 1970, two of the most significant events addressing a major public health and environmental problem were the passage of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in 1976 and the Compre- hensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). A series of headline-grabbing stories in the late 1970s gave Americans a crash course in the perils of hazardous waste manage- ment. First there was Love Canal, the community in Niagara, NY that had to be evacuated after the dis- covery that hazardous waste buried over a 25-year period had contami- nated ground water. Then the Valley of the Drums took center stage. This noxious deposit of leaking storage barrels in Kentucky quickly became one of the most notorious places in the United States. The little community of Times Beach, MO became the next national hazardous waste story. Oil contami- nated with highly toxic dioxin tainted the soil and the water in this eastern Missouri community. In all these instances, lives were disrupted and property values were ruined. Suddenly Americans began to wonder who would be next....and who would be there to pick up the pieces. The experiences of the 1970s led to the belief that a federal law was needed to protect U.S. citizens. CERCLA was the first major law designed to protect against the dangers posed by hazardous waste abandoned at sites throughout the nation. As of Jan 1, 1990, EPA Region 1 has proposed or finalized listing of eighty-four Superfund sites includ- ing nine federal facilities. Of the seventy-six non-federal facilities, the region began studies at sixty-four of them. Of the sixty- four sites where studies have began EPA has: determined the remedy for forty-one of these sites, started design at thirty-two of these sites, and started construction at eighteen of these sites. CERCLA Accomplishments Through Fiscal Year 1989 EPA Region I has selected remedies at Superfund sites totalling more than $425,000,000 for design, construc- tion, and operation. Through our enforcement efforts in FY89, the responsible parties have agreed to reimburse EPA approximately $30,000,000 for past agency costs and to perform approximately $70,000,000 of this cleanup work. Fundamental to the safe han- dling of hazardous waste are the regulations that establish a "cradle- to-grave" system for managing hazardous waste and for tracking the movement of hazardous waste from its point of generation to treatment, storage, or ultimate disposal. RCRA also imposes groundwater monitoring and finan- cial assurance requirements on the owners and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and dis- posal facilities, in order to ensure the early detection of contamina- tion and the availability of monies to address it. With the passage of HSWA in 1984, EPA was given the authority to address environmental contamination caused by historic waste disposal practices. The agency can now deal with past, present, and future contamination under the broad regulatory frame- work Congress has given it. The impact of the RCRA pro- gram in Region 1 has been dra- matic, as the following statistics show: Upwards of 5000 hazardous waste generators not previously subject to regulation were brought into the federal regula- tory scheme. As a result of the increased con- trols RCRA placed on land disposal facilities (LDFs), many chose to close and to manage their wastes in a manner other than disposal on the land. In 1980 there were 150 LDFs in Region I; today there is one. As with the LDFs, many treat- ment/storage facilities (TSFs) chose to ship their wastes off- site rather than manage them on-site in units subject to RCRA. In 1980 we had approxi- mately 500 TSFs in Region I; today we have 180. EPA has implemented an ag- gressive compliance and enforce- ment program in order to ensure that facilities comply with these important waste handling require- ments. Since the advent of RCRA, we have inspected upwards of 700 hazardous waste generators and treatment/storage/disposal facili- ties, issued 80 Civil Complaints assessing approximately $3.3 mil- lion in penalties for violations of the act, and referred twenty cases to the Department of Jus- ------- Work progresses nt the Winthrop Landfill Site in Wiuthrop, Maine (inset). Open barrels pose a potential hazard at this industry facility. tice for civil or criminal pros- ecution. Concurrent with this federal effort, the New England states implement their own hazardous waste control programs. All states in the region, with the exception of Connecticut, have been autho- rized by EPA to carry out these programs in lieu of EPA, with the federal government providing technical assistance and oversight, and taking independent enforce- ment action when circumstances so warrant. Clearly, the impact oi RCRA in Region 1 has been dramatic and has fundamentally changed the nature of our hazardous waste universe and the manner in which that waste is managed. Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) The 1984 Amendments to RCRA granted EPA more responsibility. for the first time, to regulate raw materials like petroleum and haz- ardous substances stored in under- ground storage tanks. Subtitle 1, the Leaking Under- ground Storage Tank (LUST) provi- sion of RCRA, brought 1.5 million tanks at 750,000 facilities under federal regulation nationally. In New England that translates to 100,000 tanks at 40,000 sites, and any one leak in the wrong place could wipe out a neighborhood's water supply or fill a basement with dangerous fumes. Working directly with our New England state regulatory agencies, EPA Region 1 has begun to imple- ment a pollution prevention strat- egy of finding existing leaking tanks and encouraging replacement of substandard storage systems before they fail. Also, up to $12 million has been made available to slates from the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund. The program funds staff for managing clean-ups and for direct corrective action at sites where no owner can be found. In addition several states are pro- viding bottled water temporarily to homeowners who have petroleum contaminated wells and are plan- ning permanent alternate water supplies in Rhode Island, New Hampshire and Maine, ff ------- Implementing "Worst Sites First" A Geographic Information System (CIS) enables ~EPA scientists to map potential sources of pollution together with sensitive environmental resources, such as nearby rivers and streams. PMD (refer to p. 35) provides a resource-based management approach to planning by integrating air, water, and land programs. ne of the major chal- lenges of the 1990s for Region 1's Waste Management Division will be to insure that available resources are applied to the most important environmental problems. The scope and size of the waste-related activities in rela- tion to the available resources make it extremely important that priorities be developed in a manner which insures that attention is given to the most serious environ- mental and health-related problems in the region. By developing a "worst sites first" approach, we can meet the challenge of resource allocation. It is extremely important that state and federal waste regulatory activities be carefully coordinated. The approximate numbers of waste-related activities requiring state and federal attention in New England are as follows: Category of Waste Activity Approximate Number RCRA Large Quantity Generators 3600 RCRA Facilities Subject to Corrective Action 910 RCRA Transporters 600 RCRA Small Quantity Generators 16000 CERCLA Inventory of Potential Sites 2020 Subtitle D Solid Waste Disposal Sites 2700 UPJOHN BORING WELL ANALYSIS Please Select One: 1. WILL LOG LISTING 2. C01E LOG DIAC1AU 3. CIEAI DIAGIAU AEEA 9. QUIT EPA Region I in conjunction with the State of Connecticut, has developed a pilot project for screening and ranking all waste- related industrial sources. A com- puter based Geographic Informa- tion System (CIS) locates sources (RCRA facilities, generators, Superfund sites, etc.) and important receptors (wells, population, wet- lands, etc.). An analytical model compares the environmental vulner- ability of the site with the facility- specific information (e.g. types of chemicals, potential for release, etc.). The results of the ranking pro- cess in Connecticut will be used as a tool for coordinating state and EPA regulatory activities in conducting RCRA inspections and issuing per- mits, for coordinating Superfund and RCRA activities in cleaning up sites, and for developing a common data base of environmental informa- tion collected during the study. Region 1 has been an active participant in the national efforts to promote the development of strategic plans and risk assessment techniques to identify and respond to the most pressing environmental problems within New England. We hope to expand the Connecticut pilot project to other states in the region. This would provide an important management tool for insuring that most significant envi- ronmental problems receive the attention of state and federal envi- ronmental officials. ?f ------- Office of Regional Counsel Enforcement Takes Multi-Media Approach Hurley Laing Director 1 PA has begun to focus its I enforcement program on an approach designed to increase our deterrent effect and to address the most significant environmental problems. We have evolved proce- dures during the past year which help us develop '"multi-media" cases. That is, we will be trying to examine, at one time, all of the regulatory requirements to which a facility is subject, not just one. This approach, while presenting man- agement challenges, will increase our focus on the total environmen- tal impact of a facility, should help avoid moving pollution around, and will allow us to get higher penalties and more comprehensive relief. In response to EPA's developing focus on pollution prevention, we are developing a set of policies and procedures that will lead to en- forcement case results with the potential to reduce unregulated as well as regulated discharges. An example would be a case settle- ment in which a company, in addi- tion to paying a fine, agrees to con- duct a facility-wide environment audit which includes an examina- tion of ways to reduce unregulated toxic emissions reported in the company's Toxic Release Inventory report. We are also working to con- tinue the expansion of our criminal enforcement capabilities. ?f- Clean Water Act Violations Prosecuted Enforcement case against the Dexter Company The EPA and the state of Connecti- cut have jointly brought a major civil court enforcement action against the Dexter Company in the U.S. District Court in Connecticut. The company is charged with nu- merous violations of the Clean Water Act at its paper plant in Windsor Locks, Connecticut. This is one of the largest enforcement actions ever brought by EPA in terms of the size of the company, the number and severity of the violations, and the multi-million- dollar penalty being sought. The case also is a good example of ef- fective federal-state cooperation; federal and state officials jointly prosecuted this case. Municipal Filtration Plant to Ensure Clean Drinking Water Enforcement case against the city of North Adams, Massachusetts EPA's enforcement case against the city of North Adams, Massachu- setts passed an important mile- stone during this past year. The federal court rejected the city's attempt to dismiss the federal case in favor of a state court action. The federal judge noted that the city had failed for several years to agree to any binding settlement in the state court case. The EPA brought the federal case to make sure the city moves forward and stays on track in building a filtration plant to ensure clean drinking water and otherwise complies with the Safe Drinking Water Act. The EPA is also seeking a civil penalty from ; ------- the city in view of its past record of delay. Toxic Metals and Dangerous Chemicals Discharged into Sewer Enforcement action against Borjohn Optical Technology, Inc. Borjohn Optical Technology, Inc., of Burlington, Massachusetts, and its president, John Borowski, were convicted of illegally discharging toxic metals and dangerous chemi- cals into the sewer system and of endangering company employees as a result. This was the first time in the country an individual or a corporation has been convicted of knowing endangerment under the Clean Water Act. Borowski faces a maximum of 30 years in prison and a $500,000 fine, and his company faces a maximum two-million-dollar fine when it is sentenced this fall. Superfund Site Cleanup Costs Recovered Judgment at Picillo Superfund site based on prior state lawsuit On May 31,1990, the federal court in Rhode Island issued judgment finding American Cyanimid Com- pany and Rohm & Haas Company liable for the cost of cleaning up the Picillo Superfund Site in Coventry, Rhode Island. The EPA claimed approximately $3,5 million in past costs plus future cleanup costs. The court based its ruling on a 1989 decision, in which the same court found American Cyanimid and Rohm & Haas liable to the State of Rhode Island for costs incurred by the state at the Picillo site. The court's ruling was issued as a summary judgment before trial, and the government will therefore be spared the consider- able time and expense of a trial. The decision is important be- cause it establishes a precedent for EPA to recover site cleanup costs based on prior enforcement actions by states. State governments are becoming increasingly involved in hazardous waste site cleanups and are exercising their enforcement authority more often. The Picillo decision allows EPA to take advan- tage of the states' assistance in the important and complex effort of cleaning up hazardous waste sites, without duplicating enforcement efforts. Removal Cost Recovery Settlement During the course of the year, the region settled numerous cost recov- ery cases to recoup Superfund money spent by the agency for cleanup action. One such settlement related to an emergency removal action at the Pine Street Canal in Burlington, VT, the site of a former coal gasification plant. EPA origi- nally sued three present and past owners and operators, who, in turn, brought additional owners and op- erators into the lawsuit. The settle- ment calls for the defendants to pay EPA a total of $945,000, which represents 98.4 percent of the total cost incurred by EPA. Other signifi- cant settlements for removal actions include the following: Pufman Fire and Chemical Spill Site, CT—$950,000 Cooks Landfill, W—$415,000 Bourdeauhui, CT—$429,000 Region I's Focused Effort on CERCLA (Superfund) Cleanup Enforcement In the past year, ORC has taken aggressive action to use the Com- prehensive Environmental Re- sponse Compensation and Liability Act's (CERCLA's) special notice enforcement procedures for Superfund cleanups, which allows for negotiation before court pro- ceedings. In 1990, the region used CERCLA's negotiation procedures at ten Superfund sites as a means of achieving private performance of remedial design and remedial ac- tion. Moreover, in four cases in which those negotiations have not yielded a consensual agreement with responsible parties, the region has issued unilateral CERCLA orders to compel private cleanups. All told, the enforcement effort covers ten cleanups worth approximately $180 million. This represents the region's most focused and comprehensive effort to use CERCLA's congression- ally mandated cleanup enforcement procedures. ?f Enforcement of Regulatory Statutes Region I has long been committed to a vigorous enforcement pro- gram. A key measure of enforce- ment efforts is the number of new cases recommended for litigation, or "referred," in a year. That num- ber for civil judicial cases has grown dramatically in recent years. From fiscal year FY'85 to FY'87, the number of civil referrals ranged from sixteen to twenty-two; how- ever, from 1988 to 1990, the num- bers increased to range from thirty- two to thirty-seven. Reflecting a new priority for the agency's en- forcement program, criminal en- forcement has received signifi- cantly greater attention in the re- 24 ------- gion since 1988. In each of the last three years, the region has referred seven to eight new criminal cases to the Department of Justice; prior to 1988, the number usually never exceeded two per year. In addition, in every year since 1985, the region has also initiated well over one hundred administrative enforce- ment actions. The trend has been to maintain a strong level of ad- ministrative enforcement, while placing increased emphasis on judicial enforcement, both civil and criminal. Superfund Enforcement Since the enactment of Superfund in late 1980, Region I has taken aggres- sive and precedent-setting legal actions to ensure that responsible parties at New England Superfund sites participate with EPA in ensur- ing the expeditious cleanup of these sites. Region 1 has established an effective relationship with the poten- tial responsible parties, resulting in numerous multi-party, multi- million-dollar settlements. As Superfund enters its second decade the region will continue to use the strong enforcement tools in the statute to obtain settlements and conserve fund money. &• .P1 u .!; u Using Strategic Planning to Develop Priorities To date, EPA's enforcement pro- gram has been keyed to the sepa- rately developed priorities of its individual programs. There has been little comprehensive strategic planning in the development of each year's priorities. The result has been that, although we have had significant individual successes and a highly visible overall effort, we have missed opportunities to maximize the environmental im- pact as well as the deterrent effect of our enforcement effort. We have not as yet developed mea- sures of the success of our en- forcement effort other than num- bers of actions taken, amount of fines collected, numbers of convic- tions or amount of jail time served. While these are necessary management tools, they do not say anything about actual environ- mental benefit. We have recently developed a set of ranked environmental priori- ties as part of the region's Com- parative Risk Project, and in cer- tain areas, most notably in the wa- ter program, we are doing a degree of geographic enforcement target- ing. Examples are the Merrimack River in New Hampshire and Mas- sachusetts and Casco Bay in Maine. However, these efforts are limited, and they do not involve all appro- priate program areas. The challenge we face is devel- oping an enforcement program that is planned in a coordinated fashion and involves all program areas. We need to try to find places where geographic targeting, industry tar- geting and other coordinated ap- proaches, including cooperative approaches with the states, can maximize the benefits of our en- forcement efforts. The vehicle we will use will be a four-year strategic plan for the years 1992-1995. We will attempt to involve the public and the states in the development of this plan. Our goal is to have an initial plan completed in December of 1990 and also to develop an ongoing process for review and update of the plan. ?f ------- ¥ 'J Julie Belaga presents awards to the 1990 Poem and Poster Contest winners. Fifteen hundred people were in attendance at Boston's Park Plaza Hotel. Brooke Chamberlain-Cook Director Office of Public Affairs Emphasis on the Individual I ogo, the cartoon char- acter, once said, "We have met the enemy and they is us." Twenty years ago, the environ- mental movement tagged industry as the 'bad guy' and looked no fur- ther for culprits. Today, we are realizing that we, as individuals, are also part of the problem. But, we can be a large part of the solution. Our overconsumptive lifestyle and throwaway mentality have pro- duced the biggest environmental protection challenge yet. We drive everywhere, water and mow our lawns to death, eat vegetables nest- ing in seemingly unnecessary pack- aging, and buy disposable everything. While global warming and the disappearing rain forest are enor- mous environmental problems, they are almost imponderable and often leave us feeling overwhelmed and powerless. But, individuals do have the power to make a difference through how we choose to live our lives. Choosing to use a glass mug for morning coffee over a dispos- able one helps. Choosing to carpool helps. Choosing to recycle or buy recycled paper helps. Turning off lights; turning down the heat; avoiding overpackaged products; walking or taking public transportation; dig- ging weeds out of the lawn instead of spraying pesticides all over it — all of these choices help. How to Destroy the Earth This year the Office of Public Af- fairs launched a public service campaign, "How To Destroy the Earth," designed to empower the individual to make the best choice for the environment. Using humor and reverse psy- chology to send the recycle, re- duce, and reuse message, this tele- vision, radio, print, and direct mar- keting campaign suggested simple It is the goal of the Office of Pub- lic Affairs not only to keep the public informed on the "big stories" of the day but to increase the public's awareness of the choices that we make every day that influence the environment in various ways. Through public education and media outreach, we try to keep people in- formed of exactly how their actions and attitudes make a difference. ?*• changes we can all make in our everyday lives. The public service advertising effort consisted of six 30-second television spots, six 60-second radio spots, print media ads, and an "affectionate size" 32-page "How To Destroy The Earth" bro- chure with a series of earth-wreck- ing tips. But, at the end of each ad and tip came the message "The Earth: if you want to save it, find out what you're doing to destroy it." •: ------- The advertising agency Cosmopulos, Crowley & Daly do- nated their services to create, direct and produce the campaign, and the agency is very grateful to them. Earth Day 1990 The office coordinated the region's Earth Day celebration with: ?i; an Earth Day Kick-off, which inspired EPA employees to be- come involved in the local cel- ebrations. Many employees vol- unteered to speak in schools and help with Earth Day events. '•''' an environmental speakers bu- reau, which received 150 re- quests for guest teachers in the schools and provided teacher training for EPA volunteers. the Environmental Masters Awards Ceremony. EPA pre- sented awards as part of the New England Enviro-Fest at the University of Massachusetts, Harbor Campus. Hundreds of people attended the ceremony, and twelve distinguished New England environmentalists re- ceived awards. EPA also exhib- ited at the Enviro-Fest. ,r an Earth Day walk for federal employees from the JFK Federal Building to the Boston Earth Day celebration on the Espla- nade. Tst an open house at EPA's Labora- tory in Lexington, Massachu- setts. Nearly 200 people toured the region's lab, while EPA staff discussed and demonstrated emergency response, air and water quality monitoring, asbes- tos analyses, information man- agement, and other lab func- tions. H the distribution of thousands of Earth Day posters, stickers and magnets, and "You Can Make A Difference" brochures. Environmental Education The office sponsored the region's eighteenth Elementary Education Ecology Poem and Poster Program (EEEPPP) in May and June, which attracted more than 7,500 entries from throughout New England. Other environmental education programs that have taken place throughout the year include the Adopt-A-School program, the President's Environmental Youth Awards (PEYA) program, and a high school environmental essay contest. In addition, OPA partici- pated in a number of environmen- tal conferences and forums throughout the region. Media Recognizing the powerful role that the media play in shaping public opinion and the public's need to be informed about important environ- mental issues, the Office of Public Affairs wrote and released about 250 news releases throughout the year. Regional events, such as the Big River Reservoir veto, large monetary enforcement settlements with private corporations, signifi- cant actions at federal Superfund sites, and prison terms for polluters were reported through news re- leases to newspaper, magazine, radio and television reporters. OPA staff spoke regularly with reporters at all of the major daily newspapers in the area—the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, the Hartford Cou- rant, the Providence Journal, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and many important na- tional news publications— Time, Newsweek, and Business Week. Among the more than fifty in- terviews arranged with the media for senior management staff were NBC's "Today," the Christian Sci- ence Monitor's "One Norway Street" and many more local televi- sion and radio programs. For sig- nificant events, decisions, and en- forcement actions around the re- gion, the office organized twenty on-site news conferences. For the more than five hundred daily and weekly newspapers in New England, the office wrote and published several op-ed pieces and guest columns on such topics as mercury-in-paint, pollution pre- vention, the Clean Air Act, and radon. This form of outreach serves as a means to cover important en- vironmental issues more compre- hensively for general readers. As a companion to newspapers, television, and radio as sources of environmental news, the office publishes a quarterly newsletter of major activities in the region. Called New England Environment, the newsletter highlights enforce- ment actions, reviews new and pending legislation and policy, and summarizes significant data affect- ing the environment. Freedom of Information OPA's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Office responded to 1,856 requests, an increase of 27.5 per- cent over last year. Superfund Community Relations For the residents in communities where there is a federal Superfund site, anxiety and concern is often high. The Superfund Community Relations Program seeks to keep an open dialogue with community residents, to hear concerns, to dis- cuss cleanup options, or to review risk assessments. EPA's increased outreach efforts solicit their input 27 ------- on decisions that may potentially affect their health or the environ- ment in their communities. EPA holds public meetings and hearings, as well as informational meetings with elected officials, local community groups, planning boards and various interest groups in site communities so that citizens and officials may learn, raise issues, and ask questions about site devel- opments. EPA distributes news releases, informational updates, and site-specific fact sheets to keep local citizens apprised of Superfund actions. The addition of nine New En- gland military facilities to EPA's Superfund list has provided a new challenge in information sharing for the agency. Federal military installations tend to be larger, tech- nically complex, with the potential to affect a large number of indi- viduals and communities. The residents surrounding these facili- ties have a keen interest in under- standing and participating in the decisions leading to the cleanup of hazardous waste sites on them. Seven Technical Assistance Grants (TAG) were awarded to citizen groups in communities where there is a Superfund site. These grants may be used for hir- ing independent experts to review and comment on Superfund tech- nical documents and to act as con- sultants to the citizen groups. ?f EPA exhibit at Earth Day Etwirofest. the Big River Reservoir decision, vetoing the State of Rhode Island's proposal to fill 650 acres of prime wetland to create a drinking water supply. the first-ever guilty verdicts in the nation imposed under the "knowing endangerment" provision of the Clean Water Act. A Burlington, Massachusetts company and its president were found guilty on all counts. designation of Casco and Massa- chusetts Bays as national estuaries, authorizing them for federal analy- sis and funding. the longest jail term ever im- posed in Massachusetts for Clean Water Act violations. The president of a Lowell, Massachusetts com- pany was sentenced to fifteen months in prison and ordered to pay $60,000 to the City of Lowell. the largest penalty ($254,000) for violation of hazardous waste export laws in New England was proposed against a Stratford, Connecticut aircraft engine manufacturer. Region 1's comments on the draft environmental impact state- ment (DEIS) for Boston's Central Artery/Third Harbor Tunnel project. the agreement in principle reached with AVX Corporation of New York, NY, a major defendant in the New Bedford Harbor (MA) Superfund litigation. The $66 mil- lion payment represents one of the largest settlements by a single de- fendant in the ten-year history of the Superfund program. the suit filed against United Technologies Corp. of Hartford, Connecticut for more than 100 violations of hazardous waste laws. In addition, the company was charged with violating a prior con- sent agreement. Penalties of up to $25,000 per day per violation are authorized under the law. Connecticut and Rhode Island's achievement in February as the first two states in the country to gain approval for their wellhead protec- tion programs as required under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The regional office approved Massa- chusetts' plan in March and those of Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine in September, making New England the first region in the country to have all wellhead protec- tion plans approved under SDWA. Radon Testing Month was publi- cized in February, Safe Drinking Water Week was highlighted in the spring, and National Radon Action Week was targeted in October. the suit filed against Solvents Recovery System of New England, a Superfund site in Southington, Con- necticut, seeks penalties of up to $25,000 for numerous violations to environmental permits and hazard- ous waste laws. ?f- • ------- Steve Ells Director Office of GV/errimeirt KfcktiUTfi y_nr Environmental Review The Credibility to Match Our Responsibility Earlier this year, Barry Commoner asked how it was that EPA, from its earliest days, has been so captured by an end-of-the-pipe, black-box, abate- ment-focused regulatory philoso- phy. In answering, 1 tried to re- member the imperatives that drove state and federal "pollution con- trol" programs in the sixties. I re- membered that the outrage ex- pressed by Earth Day had been building in many parts of our soci- ety for ten years. Evidence that this wave was starting to crest could be seen when, three months prior to Earth Day, NEPA (the nation's first pollution prevention statute) be- came law. Earth Day had power to bring about change because it snapped into focus an accumulated, multi-generational revulsion and heightened its political imperative. The results of that imperative were the Congressional transfor- mations of the nation's moribund pollution control laws and the creation of EPA. We at EPA were told to be the shock troops and small unofficial signs saying "Sue the b- - —s" hung in many offices and proclaimed that the law was to be our weapon. In 1970, Adminis- trator Ruckelshaus, on the day of his swearing-in and in his very first message to the employees of the brand new EPA, used the imagery of aggression, command and control: "The President has established a high priority for a major effort to attack the many environmental pollution problems which face this country. To spearhead this effort, he has established the Environ- mental Protection Agency as the first independent agency of this Administration." An impatient public demanded action. A Democratic Congress smelled blood. A Republican Presi- dent, seeing his country almost coming apart before his eyes, told EPA to produce results on the en- vironmental front — and fast. goal that the discharge of pollut- ants into the navigable waters be eliminated by 1985". People who believe in pollution prevention remember that as a lodestar. People who didn't, or who were preoccu- pied, dismissed it as merely a goal, thus missing what it really was driving at. Thus, the debate over Fore River staging area in the Boston Harbor. And so our priorities were filing lawsuits, issuing tough permits, and making many grants. Our watchwords were: the carrot and stick; to be firm but fair; to send a message and deter similar conduct elsewhere. But, as I remember it, even then there was little agree- ment on the overall strategy to use: for example, both the President and most of the states opposed the passage of the Clean Water Act of 1972, and even the House and the Senate disagreed as to what it meant. Do you remember the contro- versy in 1972 over the Clean Water Act's call for zero discharge by 1985? The law gave a clear pollu- tion prevention direction; its very first goal was "It is the national pollution prevention isn't new — it's recurring and Congress has periodically expressed its displea- sure with our singleminded and seemingly bullheaded regulatory fixation on abatement. But we saw abatement as our primary mission and with justification: it wasn't until the eighties that we got (most of) the lumps out of the water, and then realized that we had uncov- ered a new regulatory horror: the need to abate the discharge of toxic chemicals. Always, however, there was a counterpoint within EPA to our regulatory activities: we always hoped that we could break free from today's demands and do more to prevent tomorrow's problems. • ------- These regional efforts took many forms over the years, such as by doing impact statement reviews that urged less-polluting alterna- tives, by adopting regional water quality and land use policies that called for preservation of high- quality lakes and streams and warned against future pollution, by enforcing the laws calling for pre- vention of significant degradation and preservation of existing uses, and by supporting public participa- tion and air and water planning to help citizens plan for a non-pollut- ing future; and by other difficult efforts. It is admirable that EPA is now vocal in pushing pollution preven- tion. The "abaters" still want to prevent pollution; they've tried, but the system fights them. There's no inconsistency in theory between abatement and prevention (both are important, though prevention should have its turn in the sun) but there certainly is a conflict in prac- tice, in resources, and in politics. If pollution prevention is to become more than words on paper, it will require us, the Congress, and our constituencies to show more cour- age, wisdom and patience than we have in the past. Our organization, culture and controlling statutes do not encourage or reward multi- media or preventative solutions to environmental problems. Political imperatives and the constant need to justify resources demand mea- surable actions and fast results. It's similar to the dilemma of the American corporation trying to do long-term research but fearing that what it needs to fend off a raider or please its shareholders is short- term profits. Thus, pollution prevention's technical problems are tough, but the institutional barriers are tougher. Here are some environmental wishes for EPA on its twentieth birthday. I wish for us to have the cred- ibility to match our responsibili- ties; for risk information that re- lieves people's fears; for a way to have change that doesn't burden its environs; for an economy that doesn't thrive on waste. I wish for a land use ethic that doesn't smear the land; and for the Vermonts, the coasts of Maine, the Nantuckets, and Whitton Ponds, for all the small places we love — I wish that they may yet escape the tragedy of die commons. I wish for an end to disease from urban lead, ozone-smog, and radon gas; and for the courage to change our dismaying new world of acid rain, global climate shifts, ozone holes, greenhouse gasses, and rising sea levels. I wish for a government that doesn't pollute; for a society averse to the allure of pork barrel projects; for an end to decisions which shrug off the environment; and for a stop to incremental losses and perpetual rear guard actions. More than ever, I wish for a nation that agrees on its environ- mental future, not one bitterly divided and partisan, but full of hope. #• The Government Relations Staff furthers EPA's mission by inform- ing the Congress and other elected officials of EPA's priorities and actions and by responding to their concerns. The Government Rela- tions staff is the principal link with these officials, who have the respon- sibility to satisfy themselves that EPA is carrying out the laws they enacted. Their informed judgment and continued support is important if the environment is to be pro- tected. The information we give to them must be prompt, correct, and absolutely nonpartisan. Issues in- tensify and contacts increase dur- ing election years. Therefore it is crucial for the office to have a net- work of contacts to reach out and inform key elected officials in a timely manner and to follow a planned notification process which insures equity. It is the hope of our office to support our divisions and let them get on with their difficult jobs of environmental protection. A number of bills pending in Congress will have a major impact on us and New England: the Clean Air Act reauthorization; pollution prevention legislation; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) reauthorization; perhaps the elevation of the Environmental Protection Agency to Cabinet level; and others. We will be working with our divisions, with elected officials and with state officials, as some of the new federal laws will require state action in order to become fully effective. The Environmental Review Staff has been active in numerous im- portant cases. We have sought, in NEPA's twentieth birthday year, to prevent significant or avoidable environmental damage and to pro- tect the integrity of the National Environmental Policy Act process of full disclosure and public ac- countability on behalf of an envi- ronmental ethic. This year our NEPA Review staff has raised, in the face of contro- versy, questions about projects af- fecting the environment throughout New England, such as the following: 30 ------- a proposal by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to commence a program of introducing chemi- cals into Lake Champlain to kill lampreys; the plan to expand the Loon Mountain Ski area to another mountain in the White Moun- tain National Forest; Boston's mammoth Central Ar- tery/Third Harbor Tunnel project; and the absence of environmental impact statements on certain major highway construction. We are particularly proud of the contributions NEPA has made over the last dozen years towards this year's preservation (through a wetlands veto) of 700 acres of wet- lands in Rhode Island's Big River Valley and the recent deferral (by Executive action) of oil leasing on Georges Bank. Also, our earlier work on the proposal to create a civilian air cargo "hub" at the Westover Air Base, which pro- tected thousands of people in the Chicopee area from nightly wake- ups, became a precedent for recent national action. If we could send one message that would summarize the year's activities, we would urge that project managers take seriously the National Environmental Policy Act from the first stages of a major project. Save time: plan for pollu- tion prevention from the start. ?*• Using the National Environmental Policy Act to Prevent Pollution wenty years ago, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) was, as Barry Commoner says, the nation's first pollution prevention statute. Directing the federal government to follow a new ethic of the natural order, NEPA requires that our gov- ernment must use all practicable means to prevent as well as to eliminate pollution and must fulfill the responsibilities of each genera- tion as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations. To enforce these brave and lonely words, the Congress and the courts devised a new way to make the power of the government more accountable to the people and their environment: NEPA says that be- fore any federal agency decides to take any action (or to issue any grant or permit) that significantly affects the environment, that agency must prepare and show the people an environmental impact statement (an E1S) and must re- spond to their concerns. NEPA's call for impact state- ments touches two beliefs that run deep in a free and feisty people: "The truth shall make us free" and "Show me." A good EIS lays out information on impacts and alter- natives, allays citizen fears, checks the federal agency's judgement, and identifies an alternative that prevents or eliminates harm. The EIS process advocates disclosure and protection and EIS comments often favor simpler alternatives. which are often cheaper and less harmful. With the help of the courts, NEPA has improved many projects and has been present at the deservedly early retirement of a few. Though NEPA has now ended its second decade, the EIS process still struggles to succeed. NEPA's experiment of stating environmen- tal ideals in a statute, attempting to prevent pollution from occurring, and then policing the decision process by requiring that the truth be told and the ideals followed, is still bold. In fact, NEPA has be- come even more controversial as sponsors of poor projects have learned to resent NEPA's scrutiny. Ideally, the effectiveness of NEPA should depend more upon the clarity of the voices that speak for the environment than upon their volume, but these voices must be strong enough to be heard. If NEPA in the 1990s is to do its job of making government more accountable to the people and through them more protective of the environment, NEPA must get renewed support from those of you who support its ideals and the EIS process. During the next decade, with your help, we want to see all federal agencies become committed to a strong NEPA based on truthful disclosure of impacts and alterna- tives, public participation, and an ethic that impels the selection of the alternative that prevents or eliminates damage to the environ- ment. ?f ------- Ed Conley Director Environmental Services Division Monitoring and Data Gathering More Important than Ever ' hen we consider 'that regulatory pro- grams have been in place and oper- ated for some years at a cost esti- mated to exceed 70 billion dollars annually, it becomes apparent that monitoring and data management are more important than ever. While data gathering might not be glamorous, it is essential to govern- ment, the regulated community, and the public if we are to make objective evaluations of our na- tional environmental policies. Traditionally, monitoring ac- tivities have tended to be media specific and local in their scope and impact, for example, water long-term monitoring programs that will assess the status of eco- logical resources and our overall progress toward mitigating or pre- venting ecological effects. The agency is facing this chal- lenge now and is developing a pro- gram that will monitor ecological status and trends. Ideally it will help identify emerging problems before they reach crisis proportions and allow time for reasoned and balanced solutions. The Environmental Services Division, located at our lab site in Lexington, Massachusetts, is a service branch to all EPA pro- grams. ESD offers technical and Patti Tyler and Linda Martensen, biologists, prepare food for freshwater invertebrates. quality surveys in a river basin or sue specific monitoring for en- forcement purposes. These efforts must continue, but we need more if we are to improve our ability to document the condition of our environment. We must develop analytical services as well a^ emer- gency response capability at sites at which there may be an imminent hazard. This section details the specific program areas by environ- mental medium where the lab has provided needed services. ?f Air Activities The Ambient Air and Emission Monitoring Section approved air monitoring network modifications in the six New England states for ozone, particulates, and carbon monoxide; conducted in-depth audits of the New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont air monitoring programs; processed more than 1.5 million data points of air quality information; and analyzed ozone data for state implementation plans. The section observed approximately thirty emission tests at a variety of sources and reviewed twenty ex- cess emission reports. Forty-six Superfund documents and two RCRA documents were reviewed and evaluated for air monitoring; ten air toxics monitoring studies were conducted at Superfund sites and for emergency response; and i he section participated in and conducted sampling for a Title 111 Safety Inspection. Biological Activities The Biology Section has made n major investment in equipment, methodologies, culture, and testing of marine and freshwater lesi or- ganisms. Chuinpia panuilii, a ma- rine alga, is now being used for toxicity testing as well as the tresh- water alga Selenastinni capi'i- cornutum. Toxicity tests were con- ducted on contaminated sediments and efforts in this area are seen to increase in the future. Sediment oxygen demand studies were con- ducted in three Connecticut har- ------- bors for wasteload allocation deci- sion making. In addition to toxicity testing, some 250 bulk insulation and dust samples were analyzed using polarized light microscopy with dispersion staining, and expert courtroom testimony was given in several NESHAPS enforcement cases. Chemical Activities More than 2,000 samples from 239 different sites were analyzed this past year. This includes metals, nutrients, PCBs, cyanides, pesti- cides, and semi-volatile and volatile organics in support of various pro- grams. Last year, the laboratory computerized its gas chromatogra- phy and expanded its air toxics to include XAD/PWF and canister techniques. Training and certifica- tion for state laboratories are also provided. Chemical Emergency Preparedness Program - Title III Activities The Title III Program Office is responsible for overseeing Emer- gency Planning and Accident Pre- vention Programs conducting tech- nical assistance, outreach, chemical safety audits, and enforcement. A sampling of the forty-eight techni- cal assistance projects that were conducted this year includes con- tingency plan reviews, community hazards analyses, and operations reviews of Local Emergency Plan- ning Committees (LEPCs). As part of its ongoing outreach efforts the Title III office offered training courses to industry and govern- ment on computer management of emergency operations and various other planning and response top- ics. A total of ten chemical emer- gency simulations were conducted to test public response capabilities. Forty-two Accidental Release in- vestigations were issued and as a Nathan Raines, chemist, weighs soil in preparation for analysis. follow-up, four Comprehensive Chemical Safety Audits were con- ducted at industrial facilities hav- ing a high potential for chemical accidents. Title III inspectors con- ducted forty compliance investiga- tions this year. Approximately $588,000 in penalties have been issued by the Title 111 Program Office since October 1988. Oil and Hazardous Response Our emergency response program responded to more than sixty oil and chemical spills and worked closely with the U.S. Coast Guard on major marine spills which oc- curred in Buzzards Bay this year. In an ongoing effort to avert major chemical accidents, the Title III program conducted facility audits of four potential problem chemical facilities and issued four civil com- plaints to chemical companies for various reporting violations. More importantly, assistance to state and local governments in the form of simulations and contingency plan enhancement including chemical accident safety training occurred in over fifty cities and towns in the region. In the Superfund program, we issued administrative orders to potentially responsible parties to conduct removal activities at nine hazardous waste sites and funded an additional twelve removal ac- tions which resulted in mitigating immediate public health threats such as contaminated drinking water and direct contact with mer- cury, and exposure to PCBs, pesti- cides, and corrosives. These totals represent an unprecedented propor- tion of enforcement actions requir- ing removal actions by potentially responsible parties with which we have had 100 percent compliance. Water Activities The Environmental Studies Section completed forty-eight NPDES di- rect discharge inspections plus nineteen inspections for the pre- treatment program. Contributing to the Merrimack River initiative, the section provided field and lo- gistical support for testing chronic toxicity from twenty-two dis- charges. This section conducted a two-week study near Portland Har- bor as part of the Casco Bay initia- tive. Analyses included dye studies, physical/chemical field measure- ments and acute toxicity testing at four POTW's (privately owned treatment works). Extensive field efforts were made at the Nyanza Superfund site in Ashland, Massachusetts, and Carroll Products in Wood River . ------- Junction, Rhode Island. Investigative efforts led to criminal convictions in the case against Wells Metal Finish- ing, Lowell, Massachusetts. Quality Assurance Activities The Quality Assurance (QA) Office provides technical review and com- ments on QA documents and con- ducts laboratory audits developed by EPA programs, states, and EPA contractors. This process enhances the environmental data collection activities and ensures that the data collected is of known quality. The QA office conducted two field audits, reviewed seventeen QA work plans for the Superfund program, and reviewed three RCRA significant problem fac- ing the Environmental Services Division (ESD) is the iden- tification and quantification of a multitude of volatile organic com- pounds which may be in the ambi- ent air surrounding hazardous waste sites or industrial sources. Because these compounds are present in trace amounts (in the parts per billion range), the sam- pling and analysis of these com- pounds requires meticulous atten- tion to detail and sophisticated equipment. Sampling is further complicated by the diversity of responses from these chemicals and potential interferences ranging from the humidity in the air to artifact formation on the sampling media. Accurate information is critical for the risk assessment pro- cess and to ensure the protection of the public health. Currently ESD is developing and implementing monitoring and analysis capabilities for real time enforcement-related facility QA Plans. For the water program, the office reviewed plans for six bay study projects and one Boston Har- bor project. They also conducted two state drinking water laboratory inspections for certification under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA.) The Quality Assurance Office performed eight laboratory audits in support of the Superfund Con- tract Laboratory Program (CLP) and two field laboratory audits in support of Superfund enforcement activities during FY90. Addition- ally, in support of the Region I Superfund Data Validation Pro- gram, the division completed twelve oversight audits of contrac- tor performance. ?f measurements using field chro- matographs and for time weighted averages using carbon and/or Tenax absorption and passivated canisters with gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry. These methods generally measure volatile organic compounds which are nonpolar and nonreactive and have boiling points in the range of -15° to 120°C. These methods are able to measure organic compounds in the parts per billion range. Sampling has been conducted primarily at hazardous waste sites, in homes surrounding these sites, or during chemical spills. A few studies have concentrated on in- dustrial and urban impacts. Results have played a significant role in determining the amount and type of remedy, where and when to re- quire evacuations, and in the pro- tection of workers on site. ESD has also taken an active role in provid- ing technical assistance to the states and in conducting training activities. We have been an active participant in the National Air Toxics Monitoring Program work- ing closely with EPA Headquarters and the Office of Research and Development. Toxics air monitoring will play an increasingly valuable role in ESD's future. Activities, such as our current participation with the Of- fice of Research and Development in the field testing of prototype samplers at Superfund sites in Region I and our involvement with several national task force workgroups, will enable ESD to continue in a leadership role in the air toxics field. EPA's decision to perform more on-site waste treat- ment at Superfund sites will re- quire expanded air monitoring, particularly on emission sources, such as incinerators and air strip- pers. The public is demanding more information on the impact of air toxics from industrial and waste processing sources because of its increased awareness of toxics emis- sions. The challenge is to develop equipment and techniques that will meet these demands and expecta- tions. ?£ Deborah Thiem, chemist, fills vials for gas chromatograpln/ analysis. ------- Planning and Management Division Patricia L. Director Meaney A New Way of Thinking pollution prevention is "more than a new term: it is a new way of thinking. Anticipating and avoiding the generation of pol- lutants is our ticket to advancing beyond the diminishing returns of pollution treatment and control. We need to build an ethic of preventing pollution into every situation where there is the potential to create pollu- tion: not only in industry and manu- facturing, but also in public and private business, government, com- munities, and individuals. Regulations and economic in- centives will not break down all the institutional and cultural barriers to preventing pollution in each of these sectors. What we need is a profound cultural change—in our attitudes, systems, and the way we do things. EPA must reach beyond its traditional regulatory role and promote this cultural change through outreach, education, and technology transfer. While reaching out, EPA must also look inward to ensure that we incorporate the pollution preven- tion philosophy in all of our deci- sion-making processes and day-to- day business. Everyone—from EPA staff to planners to heads of corpo- rations—has a part to play in making the environmental gains promised by pollution prevention a reality. ?f IgjLr Geographic Information Systems... helping EPA Show the Environmental "Big Picture The compliance, monitoring, per- mit, and enforcement data collected by Region I program offices repre- sents a major investment in envi- ronmental information. The analy- sis necessary to draw meaningful conclusions and to support pro- grammatic decisions and strategies is often difficult when the nature of the informa- tion involves multi- year trends or re- quires integration of air, water, and land programs. Tools and technology now exist to make better use of the data collected by EPA as well as by NEW INGtAND POPUtAIION DENSITY state and local environmental orga- nizations. New visualization technologies, working in conjunction with tradi- tional automated databases, now allow us to manipulate data in the form of maps and other graphic images and can provide powerful new tools for analyzing and com- municating complex relationships, trends, and problems. Central to this process are Geographic Infor- mation Systems, which allow the storage and manipulation of spatial data along with traditionally col- lected attribute information. A Geographic Information System, for example, enables a hydrogeologist not only to review specific well data but to see well locations together with an image of the ground surface, nearby rivers and streams, and po- tential contamination sites. Two other technologies, remote sensing and Global Positional Sys- tems, are important sources of data for environmental visualization. Each of these provides the key ele- ment of location necessary to com- bine our existing environmental information into images or pictures. These new tools can deliver vital new capabilities to make full use of our environmental information. Voicemail Initially implemented as a carefully evaluated pilot program, Voicemail or AUDIX will soon be installed on most employees' phones. AUDIX is an electronic message system that provides an effective way to ex- change inlormation via telephone without requiring simultaneous participation by caller and receiver. Studies show that more than 50 percent of all business calls fail to reach the intended person on the first try and 70 percent are made only to relay information. Unlike an answering machine AUDIX allows a great deal of con- trol by both the people sending and receiving voice messages. The sender can record, review, and edit a message and then send it to a single person or a group of people. Time problems will be helped, because AUDIX allows people in different time zones to communi- cate more efficiently. After a mes- sage has been sent, the sender can use AUDIX to check whether it has been received and accessed. The person receiving the message gets useful information about the time and originator of the call and can check on messages from a remote location. The receiver can then reply to the message or forward it to someone else. Strategic Planning EPA has embarked on an ambitious strategic planning process. Region 1 participated as one of three pilot ------- regions in the FY'92 planning cycle. We developed a plan that set pri- orities for FY'92 using the results of our Comparative Risk Project as a starting point. (The Comparative Risk Project was an analysis of 24 different environmental problems in New England undertaken to determine which posed the greatest health and ecological risks and societal costs.) In 1991 Region I will be preparing a four-year strate- gic plan for FY 1993-1996. EPA is hopeful that this new process will help assure that risk information and opportunities for risk reduction are taken into account more compre- hensively. Through strategic plan- ning EPA hopes to influence the budget process, so that the budget we receive from Congress reflects our top priorities. Mail Operations The month of April brought two major changes to our regional mail operations. We converted to mail metering and contracted with Na- tional Industries for the Severely Handicapped to provide mail ser- vices. Operations ran smoothly with exceptional service during the transi- tion, and they continue to do so. Recycling Region I's recycling program has expanded significantly in the past year. The volume of paper recycled has steadily increased to the cur- rent level of about 1400 pounds per week. This spring, as part of EPA's Earth Day activities, the program reached out to all employees with the distribution of recycling baskets to every work station. The region's cleanup associated with the move out of the JFK Building produced an additional eleven tons. All paper purchased for use in the office— stationery, xeroxing paper, and paper for printed brochures now recycled paper. A related effort to recycle empty soda containers has also been suc- cessful. Empty containers are col- lected at locations throughout the office and returned to a local super- market. The deposit refunds are then donated to the Pine Street Inn, a shelter for the homeless in Boston. EPA Offices Move Region I and GSA have been plan- ning for a move from the JFK Building to One Congress Street since early last year. Five hundred and fifty employees moved in Au- gust to a new facility, which con- tains 136 individual offices, new furniture, a variety of conference space and records centers, and modern information management systems. Two floors high, divided by an atrium that is 14 feet wide and several hundred feet long, the new building provides a comfortable workplace filled with natural light. IFMS Implementation The Integrated Financial Manage- ment System (IFMS), a completely new agency-wide accounting system, was implemented in March 1989. A lot of very hard work and many frustrating hours were spent by the Comptroller's Office during this implementation. The Finance Sec- tion experienced a 50 percent staff turnover yet was able to restaff and attain IFMS expertise without reduc- ing financial services to our clients. IFMS has received software upgrades since the system was implemented. One major help was the improvement of data entry and query response time. As IFMS con- tinues to improve, Region I has taken the opportunity to partici- pate, and at times, to lead in pilot efforts to implement other IFMS modules such as Accounts Receiv- able and Reporting. Regional and National Training Programs The number of training offerings and requirements is growing to keep up with the expanding EPA staff (which jumped dramatically from 270 in FY"82 to 700 in FT90), and we have established a committee to review all regional and national training initiatives. This committee is chaired by a senior executive and comprised of representatives from each division, the secretarial advisory council, and the training office. This is the first time that the region has at- tempted to provide a comprehen- sive management overview to focus on training priorities, resources, and regional policies. * -is his past decade has witnessed some of the biggest advances in information technology. Personal computers have brought the power to acquire and manage information to every desktop. We are now in an age when data, independent of its source and media, can be freely accessed, across geographical boundaries and system platforms. Policy makers now have at their disposal a wide variety of tools to help acquire and analyze information. A number of thorny issues will need to be resolved to turn all of this technology and data into usable infor- mation: we must find ways to help users navigate more easily through the mass of available data. We will also be working toward defining com- mon data standards and data quality so that we can readily share informa- tion between organizations, fa 36 ------- The 1990 summer interns with program directors, James Younger, Allin Bond, and Jim Owens. James Younger Director iignts HBL urjjan Airanj Office of Cm Strengthening an Aggressive Regional Affirmative Action Program he recent appointment of a full-time director to the Office of Civil Rights and Ur- ban Affairs has further strength- ened an aggressive regional affir- mative action program. The Office of Civil Rights and Urban Affairs has the prime re- sponsibility for administering and monitoring policies, rules, laws, and regulations that assure non- discrimination in the employment of women, Asians, Blacks, Hispan- ics, and those with handicaps. These monitoring activities also include overseeing all EPA con- tracting and EPA financially as- sisted programs. This responsibility encompasses both the internal and external ac- tivities of the agency. The internal focus of the office will be strength- ened by the collaborative effort of the special emphasis programs and managers, such as the Black Em- ployment Program, Hispanic Em- ployment Program, and the Federal Women's Program. These pro- grams are charged with the respon- sibilities of implementing various civil rights, equal employment opportunity, and affirmative action mandates. The external focus centers on working with racial and ethnic groups and low income urban communities to convey EPA and regional employment opportuni- ties. This includes providing mi- nority contractors with related training and information on how to obtain grants, contracts, and other needed assistance. By identifying problems of interest to minority groups and facilitating solutions to those problems, we will be able to establish a link between minority groups and key Region I personnel. An initiative such as the Summer Intern Program, which brought 22 student interns, most from Histori- cally Black Colleges and Universities, to EPA for 12 weeks demonstrates a successful example of the office's internal and external focus. ?f JJLJ The civil rights agenda for the 1990s will usher in many challenges and opportunities. Recognizing that the year 2000 will bring major changes in the composition of the workforce at EPA, the region must prepare to address the following issues: 1) Providing training and sup- port to managers/supervisors to meet the needs of a culturally di- verse workforce; 2) Enhancing the recruitment, retention, development, and advan- cement of current EPA employees; 3) Increasing economic oppor- tunities for Asians, Blacks, Hispan- ics, and women through aggressive outreach; 4) Establishing and creating meaningful relationships in minor- ity and low income urban commu- nities and promoting education and awareness to environmental problems and overall EPA and region resources. Of equal importance in the future to our agenda will be the need to broaden this effort of inclu- sion and diversity to low income and urban communities that may be adversely affected by, or at risk to, certain environmental hazards. Linkages with community-based organizations, agencies, and insti- tutions will be cultivated to in- crease urban environmental educa- tion as well as awareness to EPA programs and resources. We also see the need of creating within the region a better under- standing and awareness of this office and its goals and objectives. <* ------- Paul Keough Deputy Regional Administrator THE NEW ENGLAND The Shift Paul Keough HI have been with EPA since the I early days of 1971 when the regional office officially opened its doors. Many changes have taken place since that time, and nowhere has that change been greater than in the relationship between EPA and the states. In the early 1970s few states had organized active environmen- tal agencies. Environmental activi- ties were atomized among a num- ber of different agencies and not a part of a larger organization. There were few comprehensive state stat- utes dealing with pollution. Today, we find comprehensive environmental agencies in all our New England states. The officials heading these agencies are consid- tate Responsibility ered key members of that state's administration, and the environ- mental agencies are as important as any other office in state govern- ment. All of our states have compre- hensive environmental statutes that cover a wide variety of environ- mental problems—in fact, many of these laws are more stringent and comprehensive than federal statutes. In the early 1970s most of the inspections, most of the enforce- ment actions, most of the implemen- tation of environmental programs in the states were left to EPA. The fed- eral government had more people, more resources to do the job. That has changed dramatically. The states now have far larger staffs working for environmental programs than does EPA. There are more people working for the Mas- sachusetts Department of Environ- mental Protection, for example, than are working in our regional office, and we have six states to cover. EPA's mission has changed over the years from one of direct imple- mentation of programs in the states to one of oversight and technical assistance. For example, it is the states that do most of the inspec- tions and take most of the enforce- ment actions. We supplement these actions with an aggressive enforce- ment program of our own and are heavily involved in carrying out a criminal enforcement program. ------- During the 1970s and 1980s the emphasis by state and federal envi- ronmental agencies was cleaning pollution up at the end of the pipe- line. That focus has begun to shift as both state agencies and EPA begin to focus more on pollution preven- tion—working to reduce the amount of pollution being generated in the first place through waste minimiza- tion, recycling, etc. Clearly, this will be the thrust for the 1990s. Fighting for resources to sup- port environmental programs has always been a major task at both the state and federal levels. Environ- mental agencies have prospered for the most part over the last five or six years, but the problems of defi- cits at the state and federal levels have begun to cause problems. That's why at both the state and federal levels new ways of raising revenues have been developed, and new systems with revenues going to support designated programs have been put in place. Both at the state and federal levels strategic planning exercises have been un- dertaken to make sure limited dollars are being put into projects that can accomplish the most good, where the greatest reduction in risk to public health and the environ- ment can be attained. With limited dollars available I also see the states and federal gov- ernment becoming increasingly involved with public and private partnerships. There are going to be many environmental needs for which there are no public dollars available, such as construction of drinking water filtration plants. There may be opportunities for the private sector to participate more actively in such projects and to work in partnership with local and state governments. The federal/state relationship has changed dramatically over the years, but we can say without hesi- tation that in New England we are all working together to improve and enhance the quality of our environment. ?$• ------- Connecticut DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Leslie Carothers, Commissioner This past year was a very busy one for the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. It was characterized by a significant reor- ganization of DEP units to form a more cohesive and efficient agency structure. A bold report by the Council on Environmental Quality reviewed the regulatory responsi- bilities levied on the DEP, balanced these against the financial and per- sonnel limitations imposed, and found—to no one's surprise—that the DEP was under-staffed and under-funded. The Council on Environmental Quality recom- mended that legislative action be taken to remedy this and it did with the introduction of a new fees bill. And finally, the celebration of Earth Day 20 brought about a refocusing of all the state's efforts to meet the environmental chal- lenges of the next decade. Earth Day 20 The DEP was involved in the coor- dination of Earth Day activities throughout the state, as nearly all of Connecticut's 169 towns, and many other environmental groups joined together to reaffirm a com- mitment to stewardship to our state and our planet. Highlights of the Earth Day weekend were a visit from a delegation of Soviet envi- ronmentalists to commemorate the catastrophe at Chernobyl and to pledge international cooperation in addressing nuclear problems; a star-studded evening of local celeb- rities, hosted by Joanne Wood- ward, to raise funds for environ- mental programs; and a visit from Senator Gaylord Nelson—often referred to as the founder of Earth Day, 1970—who reviewed the past Reorganization Responding to the growing envi- ronmental challenges in Connecti- cut, on July 18, 1989, after a long meticulous selection process, DEP Commissioner Leslie Carothers announced seven appointments to the newly created positions of Bu- reau Chief. "Five of these appointees," said Commissioner Carothers, "are veteran managers whose talents and commitment to the DEP's mis- sion are well known. The two new people bring diverse environmental and governmental background to the department and will help to strengthen the ties between the regulatory and resource manage- ment work of the DEP." The new bureau chiefs are as follows: Richard Barlow, Bureau of Waste Management; Richard Clifford, Bureau of Parks and For- ests; Adrian Freund, Bureau of Water Management; Robert A. Jones, Bureau of Air Management; 20 years and offered encourage- ment toward moving into the fu- ture. A special Earth Day issue of Connecticut Environment, the DEP's highly regarded monthly magazine, was published. Hugo F. Thomas, Bureau of Envi- ronmental Services; and Leslie Whitham, Bureau of Management Operations and Services. ------- Clean Water Enforcement More than $1.6 million was assessed against polluters of Connecticut waters in FY'89. This record level of fines reflects the vigor with which violators of the clean water laws are being discovered by the DEP and prosecuted by the Attorney General. "We are cracking down on pol- luters as a team," said Attorney General Clarine Nardine Riddle. To put this into perspective, the total penalties assessed in 1986 to- talled only about $100,000. In 1987, this figure zoomed to $400,000. In 1988, when Commissioner Carothers and Attorney General Riddle began their enforcement push, this figure reached the $ 1 million mark. In FY'89, the figure has continued to climb to $1.6 mil- lion. Clearly, this reflects the DEP's increasing emphasis on enforcement. Funding Fees for Environmental Programs In response to the recent report from the Council on Environmental Quality, in which it was clearly pointed out that the DEP has not had sufficient funds to adequately fulfill its environmental mandate, significant new legislation has been passed in this General Assembly to obtain new sources of funds. Two separate funds were established: the Environmental Quality Fund, and the Conservation Fund. The first will draw funds from a variety of permit, annual inspection, and reg- istration fees. The second will draw funds from new or increased fees from a variety of park, fisheries, and wildlife fees. These funds will enable the DEP to hire seventy-three addi- tional staff. We are proud of the progress we have made. We look forward with enthusiasm and confidence to meet- ing the environmental challenges of the coming decade. ?$• Maine DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRON- MENTAL PROTECTION Dean C. Marriott, Commissioner Wetlands DEP's Bureau of Land Quality Con- trol developed regulations this year for the protection of wetlands un- der the Natural Resources Protec- tion Act. The new regulations ex- plicitly recognize that Maine's wet- lands differ according to area, value, and function, and they es- tablish appropriate guidelines for each type of wetland. The regula- tions allow the denial of projects where there are alternatives to wetland alteration or for which impacts would be unreasonable based on a number of criteria. These criteria include the value of the wetland, the cumulative im- pacts of frequent minor alterations of wetlands, and impacts on signifi- cant wildlife habitat. Underground Tanks The department and industry rep- resentatives worked together to develop a program that would ad- dress the problem of obtaining liability insurance coverage for underground oil storage facilities. As a result, the legislature in April 1990 amended Maine's Under- ground Oil Storage Law to estab- lish a fund to assist owners of un- derground oil storage tanks who are in substantial compliance with the law. The fund is financed by an increase in the per-barrel fee for transfers of gasoline and other oil products by oil terminal facilities. It will enable owners and operators to meet the federal insurance re- quirements for their facilities and is expected to ensure adequate funds to facilitate remediation of con- taminated sites. Air License Fees In 1989 the Bureau of Air Quality Control proposed a new system of air emission license fees based on dollars per ton of licensed pollut- ant emitted, similar to the fee sys- tem proposed in the Clean Air Act Amendments. The proposal was designed to ensure adequate fund- ing of air quality programs and planned bureau initiatives. Al- though unsuccessful during the 114th session of the Maine Legisla- ture, the department intends to reintroduce the bill at the next legislative session. ------- Solid Waste Recently enacted legislation clari- fied the lines of responsibility for solid waste management in Maine. The new Waste Management Agency, which operates indepen- dently of the Department of Envi- ronmental Protection, will under- take the screening and selection of solid waste disposal sites and assist municipal and regional recycling efforts. The DEP's Bureau of Solid Waste Management continues to be responsible for siting, constructing, and managing a range of solid waste facilities and has imple- mented comprehensive provisions to its rules governing these activi- ties. The bureau is also overseeing a major effort to close and remediate unacceptable solid waste landfills and to provide partial funding to qualified municipalities involved in this effort. Water Quality In response to a DEP report de- scribing the problems caused by the continuing presence of color, odor, and foam in Maine waters, a bill was passed by the 114th Legis- lature mandating reduction. It sets limits for the discharge of color from kraft pulp and paper mills in the state. The limits, scheduled to become effective in 1993, are de- signed to help achieve full public use of Maine's rivers by cutting the amount of color discharged by about forty percent. Looking Ahead a Decade Every day thousands of chemical substances are dumped into the air we breathe. And there is growing public concern over the short-term and chronic health effects of air pollutants in the environment. Responding to this concern, the Bureau of Air Quality Control has established an air toxics inventory and ranking system to prioritize program development in this area. In the years ahead, the bureau will be developing administrative rules, defining control programs, estab- lishing emission and air quality standards, and collecting back- ground information on these toxic air pollutants. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS John DeVillars, Secretary Open Space In 1989, Massachusetts invested more than $30 million in the pres- ervation of watersheds, coastal areas, farmland, riverways, local conservation lands and other natu- ral resources; assets that without state aid might well have joined the rolls of countless acres lost to de- velopment. Boston Harbor Cleanup The Massachusetts Water Re- sources Authority has proceeded at a record pace and below budget in charting the awesome task of cleaning Boston Harbor. As the project continues its success will depend on the cooperation of state environmental officials, legislative leaders, and the communities that it both serves and depends upon. Recycling Reinforcing the Commonwealth's leadership in recycling, Secretary DeVillars in May announced a sweeping Solid Waste Master Plan that requires a forty-six percent recyclable rate by the year 2000. " ------- Through recycling, the state is in the position of preserving not only the environment but jobs as well. Permit Reform The Department of Environmental Protection instituted a system of reforms in order to streamline the permitting process. The new pro- gram allows permitees to file with greater ease and less bureaucracy and even comes with a money-back guarantee should the application not be considered in a timely fashion. Enforcement Under the direction of Secretary DeVillars, an environmental strike force was established to actively pursue the most egregious violators of the Commonwealth's tough environmental laws. Using existing staff in both the environmental agencies as well as the state Attor- ney General's Office, the Strike Force has had phenomenal success in charging and prosecuting those who violate the law. Coastal Regulations Massachusetts announced new additions to the already stringent Chapter 91 regulations, further protecting and enhancing the natu- ral life and commerce that is de- pendent on the Bay State's beaches and coastline. Looking a Decade Ahead Secretary DeVillars and the more than 3,500 employees of the envi- ronmental agencies have made across-the-board commitments to preserving and protecting the natu- ral landscape and heritage of this state for the future residents of the Commonwealth. From innovative programs to active enforcement, the Commonwealth's environmen- tal agencies have charted a course of action that will guarantee a su- perior quality of life for generations to come. Governor Judd Gregg announces a program of awarding state recycling grants to municipalities. New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Robert W. Varney, Commissioner Solid Waste Management Governor Judd Gregg initiated a significant recycling program de- signed to help address New Hampshire's solid waste challenges. The state has made $1.5 million available for municipal recycling grants. Municipalities and solid waste districts may apply to the state for up to fifty percent of ap- proved costs for constructing recy- cling collection, processing, and storage facilities and for purchasing recycling equipment. "A large pro- portion of the nearly 3000 tons of solid waste generated daily in New Hampshire is recyclable," said Gregg. "These new funds will en- courage communities with no recy- cling program to begin one, while permitting those with recycling programs to expand and improve them." Air Pollution Control Air quality monitoring was ex- panded into the western part of the state with the establishment of continuous monitoring stations in Keene and Claremont. The DES adopted rules controlling toxic air emissions from industrial facilities under the New Hampshire Air Toxics Control Act. Groundwater Protection Remedial actions have been con- ducted at a number of groundwater contamination sites, many of which have been identified through DES's Underground Storage Tank Program. For example, responsible parties have agreed to a cash settle- ment of $ 1.1 million for a new water system in Lochmere, where several wells were contaminated by gaso- line. The settlement resulted from over two years of hydrogeological investigations and litigation. 43 ------- Rhode Island DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRON- MENTAL MANAGEMENT Michael Annarummo, Director Wellhead Protection Program More than two thirds of Rhode Island's cities and towns utilize groundwater as the source of drinking water for their public water systems. In order to protect these water sources, the Depart- ment of Environmental Manage- ment has developed a wellhead protection program. As part of this new program, RI DEM will delineate groundwater areas that supply public systems. The suppliers will be required to identify pollution sources within these areas and to develop plans to protect groundwater within the wellhead area. The Department's groundwater staff will provide technical assistance in all aspects of the program but the program's success will depend on a close working relationship between DEM and municipal suppliers. Nonpoint Source Management Plan A comprehensive management plan has been developed to address specific sources of nonpoint source pollution in Rhode Island and to provide strategies for reducing pollution. Some of the major sources identified are urban runoff, failed septic systems, and recre- ational activities associated with marinas and mooring areas. An implementation plan in- cludes strengthening existing regu- latory programs, establishing new regulations, improving inspection and enforcement, encouraging municipalities to establish local initiatives, refining assessment of nonpoint sources of pollution, strengthening public education efforts to increase general aware- ness of the problem, and improving coordination between regulatory and non-regulatory programs within the Department of Environ- mental Management. Medical Waste Rhode Island is participating in the federal Medical Waste Tracking Program. All regulated medical waste generated in Rhode Island must be handled according to rigid regulations from the time of gen- eration in a hospital or doctor's office until the medical waste reaches its ultimate destination at an incinerator or landfill. EPA will use this demonstration program to prepare various reports to Con- gress so that national medical waste policies can be explored. Note: RI asked to be included in this program, after medical waste landed on a number of RI beaches during the summer of 1988. Narragansett Bay Under a new policy nearly 4,000 acres of the upper bay waters of Narragansett Bay will be re-opened for shellfishing. This will allow quahoggers to harvest shellfish from the productive beds north of Prudence Island for approximately twice as many days each year. This policy results from water quality testing and analysis by the Division of Water Resources that led to the determination that only under certain adverse conditions, when rainfall exceeds one inch during a twenty-four hour period or when bypasses at sewage treatment plants cause large amounts of raw sewage to flow into the bay, will shellfish beds be closed. In 1989, more than 10,000 acres of the up- per bay were closed to shellfishing for 263 days. Reorganization In an effort to streamline the regu- latory process and strengthen envi- ronmental protection efforts, Gov- ernor Edward D. DiPrete signed legislation creating the Department of the Environment. The new department will have three regulatory branches—Envi- ronmental Protection, Environ- mental Management, and Coastal Resources Management, which will be headed by commissioners with final authority over regulatory per- mitting and enforcement decisions. The director of the DOE will not be involved in decisions on individual regulatory permits or enforce.ment matters involving the regulatory branches. The director will, how- ever, be free to both advocate and intervene in the process and will retain the right to promulgate rales and regulations. Recycling Now in its second year, Rhode Island's mandatory recycling pro- gram for both commercial and municipal waste is operating in thirty-nine cities and towns. Recyclables are sorted at a Materi- als Recovery Facility and planners in the state claim that as much as twenty percent of all solid waste is being recycled. Recycled items include newspapers, assorted glass bottles, plastic soda and milk bottles, aluminum and tin cans. A pilot program to recycle corrugated cardboard began in August 1990. * 44 ------- Vermont ACENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES Timothy Burke, Secretary Comparing Risks To ensure that Vermont's environ- mental programs are addressing the state's most serious problems, the agency initiated the "Strategy for Vermont's Third Century," a comparative risk study much like Region I's "Unfinished Business in New England." Agency scientists and staff from the Departments of Health, Agriculture and Develop- ment, and Community Affairs are estimating the risks posed by twenty environmental problems to Vermont's ecosystems, human health, and quality of life. The risk reports will provide the basis for a ranking of the problems at the end of 1990 and the development of risk management strategies in 1991. Because risk data alone cannot make good public policy, an eigh- teen-member public advisory com- mittee selected the twenty prob- lems for study and approved a set of analytical criteria after hearing from hundreds of citizens as well as the state government's technical teams. This fall, the advisory com- mittee will rank the problems based on scientific information and an understanding of Vermonters' values. EPA is financing the project. Hazardous Waste In 1990 the Vermont Legislature enacted a comprehensive waste reduction and hazardous waste siting measure. The new law re- quires Vermont generators of haz- ardous wastes to review all pro- cesses that result in emissions, discharges, or disposal of hazard- ous materials and to develop a comprehensive reuse and reduc- tion plan. It establishes a state planning and siting process de- signed to provide necessary treat- ment storage and disposal capacity consistent with Vermont's commit- ment to the Regional Capacity Assurance Planning process. It also requires on-the-shelf labelling of hazardous consumer products. Public Trust Doctrine The public trust doctrine, derived from English and Roman common law, was recently interpreted to include filled land that was once under water. The Vermont Su- preme Court ruled that 32 acres of Lake Champlain waterfront land owned by Central Vermont Rail- way, Inc. and originally filled for railroad construction, must only be used for a public purpose with the discontinuance of the rail service. Chittenden Superior Court over- turned an environmental permit for construction of a marina in Lake Champlain because the devel- oper did not prove that the pro- posed encroachment would serve a public purpose. A legislative sum- mer study committee was ap- pointed to review these legal deci- sions for their impact on state ------- regulator)' programs affecting water withdrawals, in-stream encroach- ments, and docks and mannas. Growth Management Act— One Year Later Strong concerns about individual property rights have prompted some Vermont citizens to urge re- peal of the statewide Growth Man- agement Act that became law in 1989. Act 200 offers incentives for towns to plan and lays out statewide planning goals. About half of Vermont's towns voted at a town meeting on whether to support Act 200. Of the 122 towns that voted, ninety-two voted no, fourteen voted yes, and sixteen tabled the vote. However, there is still widespread support for local, regional, and state planning. Most of the towns that voted no are proceeding to create or revise their town plan. Wetlands Three and a half years after the leg- islature passed Vermont's wetlands law, the Water Resources Board adopted rules for the state's new wetlands protection program. The new rules designate wetlands on federal resources maps as Class II "significant" wetlands deserving protection from development. About forty percent of Vermont's land area falls in the category of "sig- nificant wetland." The rules allow for compensatory mitigation, which means a developer could impact a wetland if s/he can re-create the wetland's functions elsewhere. Northern Forest Lands Study The Northern Forest Lands Report, a year-long congressionally funded study, was released. It offers a plan of action and strategies to protect the working landscape of some 26 million acres of forestland through- out the Northeast. Lake Champlain A Citizens Advisory Committee on Lake Champlain Future was cre- ated and funded to serve as liaison between the public and state agen- cies that manage the lake. The committee is charged with produc- ing an annual State of the Lake Report and recommending a man- agement policy for the lake. Funding for Land Protection The legislature approved $7.25 million for the state's Housing and Conservation Trust Fund, created for critical housing and conserva- tion projects. State tax reimburse- ment programs for forest and agri- cultural lands were fully funded for this fiscal year despite the state's economic belt-tightening. Governor's Commission on Vermont's Economic Future According to the commission's report, entitled "Pathways to Pros- perity," the state must develop an economic strategy that will protect "a future landscape that today's Vermonters would recognize, and a standard of living that all of tomorrow's Vermonters will cher- ish." The report recommends pro- tecting Act 250, Vermont's Land Use and Development Law, as an integral part of the state's economic strategy, as well as the implementa- tion of Act 200, the Growth Man- agement Law. The commission recommends protecting natural resources and initiating new mea- sures for agriculture and forestry. ------- Financial Overview Salaries and Expenses 6.5% Superfund21.6% Leaking Underground Storage Tank 1.2% Abatement, Control, and Compliance 8.3% Construction Grants 62.3% Leaking Wastewater Salaries Underground Abatement Treatment and Storage Control & Construction Total EPA Expenses Superfund Tank Compliance Grants Region 1 Personnel Compensation and Benefits 16,390,000 Travel Operating Expenses Interagency Agreements Program Contracts Cooperative Agreements Grants to States Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants 585,600 6,753,400 276,300 360,300 19,700 2,895,300 2,365,800 52,800 16,455,900 29,473,900 10,531,100 3,313,500 23,419,700 965,600 5,313,900 16,455,900 1,989,500 31,463,400 13,844,600 23,403,300 23,403,300 189,910,100 189,910,100 Total 19,870,900 65,940,400 3,662,300 25,392,800 189,910,100 304,776,500 Engineers 26% Environmental 178, Chemical 7. Total 185. Life Scientists 2% Acquatic Biology 9, Microbiology 2, Other 6. Total 17. Physical Scientists 12% Environmental 52, Geology 10, Chemical 1 3, Hydrology 8. Total: 83 Attorneys and Paralegals 8% Attorneys 51, Law Clerks 4, Paralegals 4. Total: 83. Environmental Protection 14% Specialists 99. Total: 99. Technicians 0.2% Engineering Technician 1, Physical Science Technician 1. Total: 2. Administrative Support 17% Finance 23, Personnel 13, Computers 18, Grants 1 3, Contracts 7, Management and Program Analysis 1 7, Public Affairs 10, Support Services 17, Other 4. Total:122 Secretarial & Clerical 20% Secretarial and Clerical 143. Total: 143 Total Number of Employees: 710 i ------- For Further Information • f you would like additional information about specific EPA programs, please write the Office of Public Affairs, U.S. Envi- ronmental Protection Agency, John F. Kennedy Federal Building, Cam- bridge Street, Boston, MA 02203, or call (617) 565-3420, or visit us at One Congress Street. The EPA library holds an exten- sive list of environmental titles, maintains a limited supply of EPA publications, and coordinates the distribution of environmental films and videos. For extensive research, the EPA library contains books, documents, EPA reports, journals, and micro- fiche reports about air, water, and solid and hazardous waste issues. An on-line computer system puts the EPA at your fingertips provid- ing an overview of the agency from environmental laws and regula- tions to organizational charts of the agency headquarters in Washing- ton and the ten regions throughout the country. The library is located at the EPA offices at One Congress Street, Boston, on the llth floor. Hours are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. For further information, call the library at (617) 565-3300. If you encounter an environ- mental problem, report it first to your local, and then state pollution control agency at the telephone numbers which follow. For specific information about EPA programs, call the following EPA telephone numbers: U.S. EPA, New England Office (Region I) (617) 565-3420 Asbestos (617) 565-3744 Air Division (617)565-3800 Automobile Complaints Massachusetts 1-800-631-2700 Other N.E.States 1-800-821-1237 Chemical and Oil Spills, 24 hour number (617) 223-7265 Government Relations (617) 565-3414 Impact Statement Review (617) 565-3414 Lexington Lab (617) 860-4300 Pesticides (617) 565-3932 Pesticides Hot Line 1-800-858-73 78 Personnel (617) 565-3719 Regional Counsel (617) 565-3451 Title 111 (617)860-4385 Superfund (617) 573-9610 Underground Storage Tanks (617)573-9604 Waste Division (617) 573-5700 Water Division (617) 565-3478 Permit Compliance (617) 565-3493 Surface Water Quality (617) 565-3544 Drinking Water (617)565-3610 Groundwater (617) 565-3610 ------- New England State Environmental Agencies Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection 165 Capital Ave. Hartford, CT 06106 (203) 566-5599 24-hour Spill number: (203) 566-3338 Maine Department of Environmental Protection State House, Station 17 Augusta, ME 04333 (207) 289-7688 24-Hour Spill Number: 1-800-482-0777 Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge St., 20th Floor Boston, MA 02202 (617) 727-9800 24-Hour Spill Numbers: Business Hours (617) 292-5648 After business hours (617) 566-4500 (State Police Communication Center) New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Health and Human Services Building 6 Hazen Drive, P.O.Box 95 Concord, NH 03301 (603) 271-3503 24-Hour Spill Number: 1-800-346-4009 Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management 9 Hayes St. Providence, Rl 02908 (401) 277-6800 24-Hour Spill Number: (401) 277-3070 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources 103 South Main St. Waterbury, VT 05676 (802) 244-7347 24-Hour Spill Number: 1-800-641-5005 49 ------- This report was produced by EPA's Office of Public Affairs. DIRECTOR Brooke Chamberlain-Cook EDITORS Deborah Johnson Alice Kaufman CONTRIBUTORS Norman Beloin Larry Brill David Conroy Timothy Conway Jeffry Fowley Bart Hague William Holbrook Greg Kennan Andrew Lauterback Ira Leighton Kevin McSweeney Robert Mendoza Linda Murphy William Nuzzo Robert O'Meara Marv Rosenstein Susan Studlien William Torrey Edward Woo PHOTOGRAPHY Cover: Jerry Howard®/Positive Images Howard BrettVImage Photo pp. 26 (top), 28 (both photos), 37 (top) Brooke Chamberlain-Cook, p.3 Jerry Howards/Positive Images, title page, pp. 2,7 (top), 11,12 (bottom) 16,17, IS (top) 23 (right) 38,39,48 Stephen Jennings8, pp. 1,7,12,23, 24,26,29,32,37 Deborah Johnson, pp. 29, 32, 41, 45, 46 Alice Kaufman, pp. 32, 40, 42 Karen Levitt, pp. 33, 34 NH DES, p. 43 Remediation Technologies, Inc., (inset) p. 21 Elaine Stanley, p. 21 This publication is printed on partially recycled paper. ------- |